Why rar archives do not belong in torrents

I tried that, and I still have the exact same problem; After it extracts the first set of files in the first sub-folder, it stops This is getting weird - I've never seen this type of problem before The only changes aside from your suggestions which I tried implementing that I've made to this script, are quotation marks.

Other than that, literally nothing changed and it stopped working properly, as if by magic after upgrading my system. I'm really confused, to be honest Crapshoot is not a valid way of debugging. Time to debug. Run this:! Files found: 5 Let us know if that helps.

Ok, I'm not entirely sure what the heck that did, but Something about an unexpected redirect??? Edited to add this: By the way, all the sub-folders have a series of rar files that "need" to be extracted which is what I'm testing this all on. To give you a visual idea - the image not thumbnail Basically since it's a friend I'm trying to help, I have his folders actually copied on to my hard-drive Either way i see in the screenshot that you are running sh explicitly, despite the fact the script is for bash as indicated by the hashbang.

Ok, so Shell or Bash? What's the difference? And aside from that, I'm still not exactly wrong with the script. It worked just fine about two or three years ago I install updates and it's not working? I'm not sure what exactly the problem is to begin with; I don't know what the right question is for that matter! Edited to add this: And even using "bash extract.

If you have executable bit set,. If you call shell explicitly, you override the header of the file. There are different kinds of shells with common basics but with different feature sets.

That debug. We are getting close. I believe there are a rar file in the folder you are executing the script, as only one file is found. Please run again the debug script, but now in only one of these two ways: bash. Same output as before That's just because it doesn't show. Here's a breakdown - r. They're all rar files.

My script in the past recursively looked for those files in the subfolder and extracted them either for a video, or ISO image.

If one of the rars are missing I can't get the file completely extracted. That was the whole point of the script.

Now it finds the first set, and then after extraction it stops. It's not a hidden filetype. Occam bets 20 bucks and his razor that there is no rar file as in characters 'r' 'a' 'r'. It's been that way for years. I'm trying to get help on fixing my now outdated, apparently You need to change the coding strategy.

Both your current script, and my debug script look for files only named 'something. My guess is that the torrents now come in a different packaging, split, and naming convention. For what you have been saying, that was not the case before. Also, if the script worked before and not now, it also confirms that the naming convention has changed.

You can check the "Keep incomplete files in" box and then select a folder. So when you start downloading the saves the torrent into that folder and then when it is complete it transfers it to your download destination.

It appears to be moving each file in a torrent as it completes. This causes torrent expander to get triggered as soon as the first rar is passed resulting in an incomplete attempt to unpack. The torrent then goes dead because I'm using destructive mode. PS I'm using destructive mode becuase my source never has leech.

It's only a seed. This means I have to go in and manually nuke the archives. Board index All times are UTC. Sahi performed this study during the summer, but it is unclear whether the study spanned the entire summer, a month, a week, or a day. Hopefully the paper will identify why the trackerless BitTorrent was chosen for study as opposed to other parts of the BitTorrent ecosystem.

Your operationalization of copyright infringement is interesting, but it seems like it may skew the study in one way i. This finding of infringement, of course, is subject to a raft of limitations or compulsory licenses in Sections through Since copyright infringement is a strict liability issue i. We are presuming for the sake of this argument that it is inapplicable.

This means that from a legal standpoint, it is possible that any file on such a distributed network technically is an infringement under Section a. The ultimate finding of liability, however, gets made subject to the limitations and compulsory licenses in Sections through of the current Act.

How could all this legal mumbo affect the study? Well, it could affect the study in a significant way if it does not take into account a variable for actual ownership of the source material from which the traded digital file was ripped. This matters, for one, because the first sale doctrine may be an applicable limitation. Second, if you can get a way to determine and operationalize source ownership, then the study can probe deeper into whether or not the digital files on the network are, indeed, technical infringements i.

Did you pay anything if you copy some sites of the book at home? Is there any advertisement in the borrowed book? Did you pay anything for it but your health if others have polluted the water? Is there any advertisement?

Did you pay anything for it but your health if others have polluted the air? You can breath freely, highly, low and deep as you wish. Umm … I should probably praise the political courage necessary to write that, given the way Bittorrent has been used as a catspaw. Your title is misleading. Stop fucking nitpicking.

You all download copyrighted material. All of you do it, all of the goddamn time. I very much doubt your accusation applies to everyone who has commented. It tells us what proportion of our culture i.

I am perfectly aware that I break the law when I download copyrighted material. Culture is fundamentally a shared experience. Take away our ability to share it freely and what you have is at best commerce, not culture. We should be using it to regulate commerce, where it is well suited to solving very valid business conflicts. After all, the reason many most?

Here is an interesting discussoin on Copyright and its affect on our culture and how it can stifle the sharing of knowledge. Curious about the copyright status of the items they could not classify. The study indicated percentages of the categories they could classify, but not these. Not sure I get all the emphasis on copyright. First, it should be fairly obvious that it torrents that have trackers would be preferred by those seeking to distribute files that they want to or have an obligation to distribute.

Nearly every Linux distribution, for example, uses bit torrent to distribute files, and they are all using trackers. But how many times were the files downloaded? This table shows downloads only through trackers connected to the official torrent server. So this would total to 1,, downloads, just of Fedora release that would have been current on Jan 18, This all adds up to a very substantial non-infringing use see Betamax. The study itself was interesting, but to publish the conclusion, even with caveats, I do not feel was completely responsible.

I completely agree, and would have loved to have been a fly on the wall when these issues were discussed. If you can gain policy-credibility by stating the utterly obvious, go for it. Call me naive or old-fashioned if you want, but I believe that we should publish our legitimate research results regardless of who might find them inconvenient. Of course one should question the ethical code of academics.

I would not want to imply however that something should not be published, or kept secret just because it is inconvenient. Rather the opposite, precisely because it is inconvenient, it should be published.

However, when a conclusion is present from a data set that has all kinds of limitations, the choice than becomes, how is that data summarized, and how is that summarization presented. Our freedoms are being assaulted everyday, and that is the inconvenient truth.

Everyday our leaders, some of them who have pledged themselves to high sounding ideals of transparency and openness, are using the spector of copyright infringement to push secret deals like the A. That is the world we live in, and unless we speak out our freedoms will continue to be eroded, and world will not be a better place for that erosion. So I take no exception to your claim of ethics, but neither should you claim that I wish to censure any truth, I just desire to have all facts accurately portrayed.

The fact that there are those who misuse any inaccuracies to bend all of our rules to their mean wants suggests we should welcome any criticism which strives to accuracy. I run transmission on my MacBook Pro and use it to help distribute things their creators want to be distributed.