Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Snag the Red Hat 9 ISOs, via Cash or BitTorrent

Posted by jamie on from the p2p-doesn't-mean-pay-to-play dept.

Red Hat Linux 9 is out, and as of today the ISOs are officially available to Red Hat Network subscribers ($60/yr). Or, as of right now, you can grab the same ISOs using BitTorrent. For those unfamiliar with this free/Free P2P download protocol, an introduction follows, written by ololiuhqui. Update: 03/31 23:45 GMT by J : After roughly four hours, BitTorrent has transferred over 500 full copies of all 3 ISOs, and a total of over 1.5 TB, at 170 Mbytes/sec. Thanks to the more than 3000 people who helped each other download the data, and especially to the more than 200 who got full copies and still have their clients open, to keep serving data to everyone else :)

Tectonic Rumblings

Every so often a new tool comes along that causes a shift from Bronze to Iron, that divides history into "before" and "after." The peer-to-peer world has certainly seen its share. Those who used 486s to encode and play MP3s remember it wasn't just abysmal modem speeds that kept people from casual trading, but the tiresome process of finding users and content; Napster freed us from that bondage, letting the computer do the heavy lifting and freeing people to do what they do best.

When the weaknesses began to show in Napster's overly centralized model, Gnutella stepped in with a distributed, decentralized network. Audiogalaxy gave us astounding variety (even the most obscure music could always be found sooner or later) and a rich sense of community that is still sorely missed. WinMX offered the ability to connect to multiple Napster-compatible networks; with the advent of multi-source downloading, Morpheus and similar programs allowed us to rise above the limitations of slow upstream (until it's hard now to find any P2P applications that don't use it); and EDonkey added the nice touch of being able to share files before they were done downloading.

So what's the next stage of P2P evolution?

Enter BitTorrent -- a "swarming, scatter and gather" file transfer protocol developed by Bram Cohen that's taking the net by storm. Even without a friendly, unified interface, BT's ability to scale in the face of overwhelming demand while minimizing the free rider problem ("leeching") has attracted a flood of new users. But as with any tool, understanding how and why it works will always make using it easier and more fun.

All technical references are taken from the BT server tutorial and the official documentation.

Let's Start with the Basics

BitTorrent is not a 'website' or a 'network', and strictly speaking is not even a program -- it's a protocol with a number of functional implementations.

Instead of jumping right into downloading, first we'll discuss how files are served. Most new BT users are familiar with going to a website and clicking on links to .torrent files, but this just provides a friendlier interface and isn't actually necessary. All you really need to serve is a public Internet machine. The "tracker" will "keep track" of who is connected and who has which pieces of the file(s) in question. Like any public Internet service, a static IP address and/or valid hostname will make it easier for people to connect to your tracker.

To start serving, you choose a file or directory to serve and run a program which generates a .torrent file. This contains a 'hash,' which serves as a checksum to ensure the file is the same on all systems, as well as the address of a tracker. A typical .torrent file is quite small, typically 5-50k in size.

The second step is to load the .torrent file into a BT client. The client asks you where to save the file, you point it at the existing and complete copy, it verifies that the file hash matches, says the download is done and sits there uploading when necessary until you cancel it.

Here's an animated graphic (.mng, currently viewable only in Mozilla) of a torrent transfer.

Getting Started

The official BT client is available for Win32, Mac OS X, as an unstable Debian package, and as Python source code.

Getting started is quite simple; the Windows installer asks no questions and provides no options, and the only behind-the-scenes addition is that Internet Explorer now launches BT when you click on links to .torrent files. (Mozilla users will need to edit Preferences, Navigator, Helper Applications and add the mime type "application/x-bittorrent", to be launched by the btdownloadprefetched executable.) You can also download .torrent files and load them locally without going through a website.

Once the .torrent has been invoked, the client will prompt you for a location to save the file to. The client then creates a file of the appropriate size containing all zeros, and connects to the tracker to get a starting list of some random subset of available peers (other users connected to the 'swarm'). BT then starts connecting to peers and downloading random chunks of the file, and begin uploading to other peers as soon as you have enough for it to bother.

Every time your client verifies another piece of the download, it tells the tracker it has a good copy of that piece. By directly utilizing each user's outgoing bandwidth, downloads can be generally be completed very quickly while minimizing the load on the original server, in effect turning the dreaded "Slashdot Effect" against itself -- the more who want to download, the more there are to upload. Sooner or later (usually sooner), the download is done, and the client continues to upload pieces to other users.

What's In It For Me?

Now your first instinct at this point might be to close the program, but you really ought to leave it open as long as possible afterward, to help seed the file into the network. But this is really a social and cultural issue which can't necessarily be addressed through technical measures; BT can enforce fairness during the transfer with its algorithms, but no software can force the user to keep the client open. Many tracker owners keep a close eye on such things, and will generally ban repeat offenders. In any event, "giving back" your bandwidth has never been easier, even for users behind firewalls or NAT (although as always, being able to avoid or go through these will make the transfers more efficient).

Alternative Clients and Other Tools

That said, there are perfectly valid reasons to want some control over the amount of bandwidth a P2P application uses, and an experimental, unofficial client (Win32, Python source) has been created to provide a friendly interface for this. BT will automatically adjust your download speed appropriately if you set a slower upload speed, but it's still an invaluable tool for some cable and DSL users whose downloads will choke and abort if they use too much upstream, or for anyone with limited upstream who wants to reserve some of it for other uses.

Currently, both the official and experimental GUI clients use a separate window for each transfer. BT++ (Win32, Python source) has made an initial attempt at combining all transfers into one window, as well as offering some other enhancements, but users report mixed results, with some saying "it works for me" and others that it's buggy to the point of unusable; still, it's one to keep an eye on. (Caveat: BT++ provides an option to automatically stop uploading when the download is completed. I believe this deliberately encourages people to do so even if there is no real need to do so, and would advise anyone using BT++ to refrain from using this option; it's unnecessary, detrimental to the BT networks, and may lead to your IP being banned as described above.)

TorrentSpy (Win32) is another useful tool that shows various statistics about your transfers, including which files of a multi-file torrent are complete. It's not meant to replace a downloading client, but to complement it.

I should add that the speed and time-to-completion numbers may not be wholly accurate, and will typically fluctuate wildly to some extent during a transfer. (After all, do you believe Windows when it tells you how long it will take to copy a file?) The "percentage completed" at least is accurate, and you may be able to get more accurate information using TorrentSpy. A new version of BT has just been released (3.2) and its reported changes include "more even and consistent download rates".

A Few Miscellaneous Points

It's quite possible to generate .torrents for files you want to serve and then advertise them on someone else's tracker. Since anyone can run a tracker, BT is more like IRC, Usenet or Direct Connect than something like Kazaa. Like Freenet, it works best if the content is highly in demand; it's also more effective on recently released stuff. One highly recommeded website is Bstark. It doesn't provide .torrents for anyone to download, but functions as a "metatracker", that is, a tracker that keeps track of trackers. If you're a statistics geek, the graphs are a lot of fun, and even for the average user it's a simple way to check what files are most in demand and most in need of someone to serve them. This is even more effective when you combine it with an alternate means of communication such as IRC or email, making it easy for users to check supply and meet demand. The .torrent file can also be distributed by any means, be it a website, IRC channel, email attachments or perhaps carrier pigeon.

Conclusion

With the 'entertainment industry' finally focusing their attention on IRC, the cantankerous and difficult granddaddy of Internet file sharing, BitTorrent has found a niche and filled it admirably. The author understandably wishes to focus upon using BT in a legal manner. As with any new invention, "the street finds its own use for technology," and BitTorrent will undoubtedly continue to be rapidly adopted for both licit and illicit use.

Given the decentralized nature of BT networks and the rapid development of new tools, it's only a matter of time before someone writes a GUI wrapper for an IRC client, web browser and all-in-one BitTorrent interface. After all, Napster did it, as do most other mainstream P2P apps like Kazaa. Like Direct Connect with its 'hubs,' there will always be multiple BT servers available, and a unified interface would not only make it easier for users to find and download content, but free them to focus on forming the social and cultural networks that are also needed. A website typically uses far too much CPU and bandwidth to handle popular traffic, but a BT tracker uses minimal bandwidth by itself. Perhaps the next-generation clients will try to automatically locate trackers, or help the user find and serve older content as well as new releases.

The late great Audiogalaxy had many strengths, but one of its most fundamental was the sense of community it encouraged. BitTorrent wisely fills a narrow set of technical requirements, leaving a great deal to human need and will. The ad hoc arrangements and customs that have so far sprouted as expressions of the will to fill these needs are often chaotic and messy -- but that's human action for you.

79 of 625 comments (clear)

  1. Much better than all of us rushing the FTP servers by man1ed · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I remember when 8.0 came out, it was days before I could find a mirror that didn't already have too many users connected. I think it is a great idea to use p2p to to distribute it.

  2. YES! by FortKnox · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The best way to help Open Source Companies (a la RedHat) survive is to circumvent their income strategies!
    Tell RedHat to screw off! Circumvent the subscription policy with P2P!

    Is that a bullethole in your foot?

    --
    Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
    1. Re:YES! by elmegil · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not only that, but do it with a package that works "best" on Windows, under Internet Exploder! (don't EVEN ask me about trying to get it to work with phoenix or mozilla or any other reasonable browser).

      --
      7 November 2006: The day Americans realized corruption and incompetence weren't addressing 11 September 2001
    2. Re:YES! by bramcohen · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Redistribution isn't 'circumvention'. The GPL specifically requires that it be allowed.

      Strange that people seem to be so religious about all the details of the GPL, except when it might hurt RedHat, in which case it's okay for them to sell it like proprietary software.

    3. Re:YES! by labratuk · · Score: 5, Informative

      Their income strategies are to pay huge amounts for the bandwidth of thousands of people downloading their .isos?

      --
      Malike Bamiyi wanted my assistance.
    4. Re:YES! by gmuslera · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Download open source program is boring, where is the excitement? the sensation of danger, doing something illegal, doing something behind the usual channels?

      For windows users this way to download an er.. "unnoficial" way to obtain the official redhat would be as running kazaa, edonkey, or similar, in a legal way, to get a software that should be free but they feel as they should be paying for.

      That is the key for linux adoption, not giving distributions as something so free to windows users, but show them in the same way that pirated software, this will give value to it and after all the effort getting it, they will appreciate the software more, will try actually to install it, and maybe they will adopt it as their official OS.

    5. Re:YES! by eyez · · Score: 2, Informative
      Strange that people seem to be so religious about all the details of the GPL, except when it might hurt RedHat, in which case it's okay for them to sell it like proprietary software.

      Last I heard, the redhat cds contained proprietary software. They do contain plenty of GPL'd stuff, but redhat adds a bunch of non-GPL'd things in. If I remember right, they leave the non-gpl stuff off the first cd, so the first cd would be perfectly fine and happy to distribute on bittorrent. However, if any of the iso's contain NON-GPL'd NON-BSD-licensed software, they no longer can be distributed as if there's a huge THIS IS ALL GPL sticker on it.

      You could theoretically create new .iso's which do not contain the extra copyrighted non-gpl packages, but i highly doubt that that's what isos you're looking at on bittorrent.

      --
      get 0wned. irc.w30wnzj00.com
    6. Re:YES! by Mr.+McGibby · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Have you actually tried to get it to work under mozilla or phoenix? Do you even know what the hell you're talking about? It's obvious that you don't. "Oh, WAAA! It doesn't install with a single click in Linux!" Guess what, nothing does.

      It *isn't* a IE browser plugin as many folks have claimed. The installer simply installs the program like any other program, and then adds the correct mime-type and windows extension handler to IE. THAT'S IT. Writing an installer that makes it easy to install in Windows is a good thing, since doing so adds large group of users to the user base.

      All the tools to setup torrented downloads work best in Linux. I use BitTorrent in Linux all the time and it runs just like any other program. It's very nice.

      Installing almost any program like this that works well with mozilla or phoenix is impossible. Tried to install the Flash plugin? It sucks rocks. Bram and the BT crew can't be held responsible for the fact that creating a slick interface to Linux browsers is like trying to keep 10 polygamous wives happy. Nothing works the same way twice.

      --
      Mad Software: Rantings on Developing So
    7. Re:YES! by azzy · · Score: 2, Informative

      The BitTorrent instructions for linux are very simple. edit /etc/mailcap with a few relevant entries (see below) and by default links to torrent files (using correct mimetype -see below) open seamlessly with bittorrent.

      edit: /etc/mailcap

      ## Adding BitTorrent
      application/x-bittorrent; /path/to/BitTorrent-3.1/btdownloadprefetched.py %s; test=test -n "$DISPLAY"

      edit: /etc/httpd/conf/apache-mime.types

      application/x-bittorrent torrent

      It's as simple as that. Any site that /doesn't/ send torrent files with correct mime type, you just download the file, and run: btdownloadprefetched.py 'filename'

      Bittorrent does not work /best/ on windows, or with IE, it works on many platforms.

    8. Re:YES! by tuffy · · Score: 4, Informative
      Last I heard, the redhat cds contained proprietary software. They do contain plenty of GPL'd stuff, but redhat adds a bunch of non-GPL'd things in. If I remember right, they leave the non-gpl stuff off the first cd, so the first cd would be perfectly fine and happy to distribute on bittorrent. However, if any of the iso's contain NON-GPL'd NON-BSD-licensed software, they no longer can be distributed as if there's a huge THIS IS ALL GPL sticker on it.

      That's not true, and has never been true. Here is a portion of the EULA from Disc 3 of RH 8.0:

      Most of the Linux Programs are licensed pursuant to an open source EULA that permits you to copy, modify, and redistribute the software, in both source code and binary code forms. With the exception of the content of certain image files identified below, the remaining Linux Programs are freeware or have been placed in the public domain.
      In short, there is nothing in the personal, downloadable editions of the Red Hat distribution that is not GPLed, open sourced or otherwise not free to redistribute.
      --

      Ita erat quando hic adveni.

    9. Re:YES! by tuffy · · Score: 2, Informative
      Maybe I'm missing something but doesn't the piece you quoted explicitly say that there _are_ "certain image files" that may not be freely redistributed?

      Red Hat's logo and bluecurve theme are protected under trademark law and their use is mentioned on Red Hat's site. But distributing them is okay under fair use so long as the distro isn't modified from the original (in which case you'd have to call it something other than "Red Hat").

      --

      Ita erat quando hic adveni.

    10. Re:YES! by ajs · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Check out the list of packages included with Red Hat Linux 9. You'll find exactly zero non-free software. There is one file (the README, perhaps? It's been a while) that states that while you have the right to copy it (the file), you do not have the right to modify it (the file). If you have a problem with that, dump the GPL now, because the GPL (the document itself) has the same proviso as does the BSD license. FreeBSD even has a whole document devoted to how various degrees of restrictive licensing interact in the ports system.

      But you are probably thinking of the Office and Multimedia Applications CD which is not part of Red Hat Linux 9, but rather an add-on 7th or 8th disk included with Red hat Linux 9 Professional and you will find that the licensing on all of that software includes specific language that allows for duplication of the Red Hat Linux 9 Professional ISOs. These packages are also not required (in fact, I don't even think they're referenced) by the base installation of the software.

      What I don't understand is how there can be such wild misinformation as there has been about Red Hat.

      This move has the obvious intent of invoking one of the more useful properties of the Internet: it interprets restraint (I'm generalizing the concept of censorship, which is usually what is cited in this particular quote) as damage and routes around it. Red Hat was spending more and more money per release on providing ISO downloads. What to do? Stop providing a download for the ISOs and let the community create a better solution. If they didn't think the community would do so, they certainly would not be in the free software business (I say free software only because Red Hat as a company pre-dates other terms for this business model, not be cause "open source" would not have applied equally well).

  3. Red Hat financial problems by ablcmx · · Score: 5, Funny

    Red Hat must be in serious trouble if they couldn't afford the .0 to append to the 9!

  4. BitTorrent not working well by Drunken+Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Estimated time left: 75 hours 25 minutes 35 seconds

    Current download rate: 3 kB/s
    Current upload rate: 35 kB/s

    Seems to be some sort of bottleneck :(

    Is it available at any FTP mirrors yet?

    --
    Have you been stalked by Seth today?
    1. Re:BitTorrent not working well by nstrom · · Score: 4, Interesting

      BitTorrent takes a little bit of time to get up to speed, please wait a few minutes, and your download speed should go up.

    2. Re:BitTorrent not working well by karen_sjet · · Score: 2, Informative

      Neither is Red Hat Network. I've been downloading ISO 1 for about three hours (I'm on a university connection, so download speed isn't an issue) and curl estimates another four hours for the download to complete. At this rate I will have all three ISOs in 21 hours. I guess that's still before the non-RHN-subscribers...

    3. Re:BitTorrent not working well by The+AtomicPunk · · Score: 5, Funny

      This is true. I started out with 12 hours time left, I'm now at 6 hours. I suspect over time, this number will approach 0. :)

  5. New /. headline by Limburgher · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Slashdot provides free BitTorrent stress test/load analysis"

    --

    You are not the customer.

    1. Re:New /. headline by TheSHAD0W · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yup! And so far, it seems the weak link in the whole shebang is the DNS...

      If you're having problems getting BitTorrent to work, especially "bad data from tracker", use:

      http://207.44.142.96/redhat9.torrent

  6. How about some ethics ? by InodoroPereyra · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Red Hat, a company supporting lots of developing in the GNU/Linux community, releases their newest version as a privileged one-week-early download for their customers through their network. In the meantime, Slashdot publishes this inflamatory plug for bit torrent, as a workaround to kind-of-boycott Red Hat's policy.

    Correct me if I've got the facts wrong. But it sounds to me like a week long wait is not really long, and that this announcement in Slashdot is not really ethical ...

    1. Re:How about some ethics ? by bramcohen · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Maybe RedHat should release their stuff under a 'turns into GPL after a week' license if they don't want their software redistributed quickly.

      Charging money for a week is no different than charging money indefinitely. BitTorrent is a great tool which RedHat can use to get their bandwidth costs under control so they can focus on their core business, whatever that may be.

    2. Re:How about some ethics ? by alaric187 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, you've got the facts right. It's just that most people here want free as in beer and not free as in speech. I swear if Microsoft was free most of the people here would be switching to it right now. This open source thing is just a red herring for "I want free stuff because I deserve it."

      Thanks in advance to mods for extra tasty troll points.
      Also, notice I said most not all, I know there are lots of people that believe in open source.

    3. Re:How about some ethics ? by teamhasnoi · · Score: 2, Funny
      Perhaps this was a carfully crafted ploy to overload servers, and encourage users to *purchase* RH9.

      Wait, this is Slashdot. ITS A FREAKIN' FREE FOR ALL! W00T!

      Now would be a good time to go after Slackware, or Mandrake... ;)

    4. Re:How about some ethics ? by warpSpeed · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Correct me if I've got the facts wrong. But it sounds to me like a week long wait is not really long, and that this announcement in Slashdot is not really ethical ...

      Once you have the bits they are yours to do with as you please.

      I'll bet that RedHat is offering the pre-access to the bits for the subscribers so that they can actually get the bits before thier servers are /.ed from the unwashed masses.

      And I would bet that RedHat is happy to off-load the downloading to something like BT. It just makes thier bandwidth usage go down, and most likley the people sharing the bits were not going to buy support anyway.

    5. Re:How about some ethics ? by nooch · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Maybe you can tell us why it is not ethical to offer an alternate method to acquire the ISOs, which are free (week or not), early. It's not like this places any burden on RedHat. It takes the load off their servers, allowing people who would have hit RedHat, or their mirrors, for the ISOs in a week to get it earlier. This also allows for more people to test it in the early phase of release. Sounds like a win-win situation to me.

      Don't bother to say that the people who paid the $60, or whatever fee, paid for the right to get it early. That is just silly. They paid for the service they are getting from RedHat, as well as the ability to D/L the ISO from RedHat.

      Personally, RedHat can say 'bye' to me. I am going back to Gentoo. We don't need no stinkin' surveys.

      -J

      --
      Fire in the sky
    6. Re:How about some ethics ? by TV-SET · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Actually, it depends on how you look at it.

      From one hand, using p2p networks to download latest RedHat's ISOs is going against supporing a Good(tm) company.

      On the other hand, paying RedHat 60$ a year, and then going and downloading latest ISOs from p2p actually helps RedHat to save some bandwidth for those customers who complain too much. This might be actually helping RedHat in terms of partially paying their bills using the resources of those p2p users. :)

      The company I work for has a bunch of subscriptions to RHN, both Basic and Enterprise, but we are still getting 1-2KB/s download speeds currently. P2p might improve our satisfaction on the subject though. :)

      --
      Leonid Mamtchenkov ...i don't need your civil war...
    7. Re:How about some ethics ? by tomlord · · Score: 3, Insightful


      This is good for Red Hat. There are some obvious PR benefits to it, of course.... but I think it amounts to R&D they'll eventually capitalize on.

      RHATs central servers -- not just for isos but also for updates -- are a vulnerability; a single point of failure six different ways from tuesday. (There's even another post in this /. topic about the servers allegedly being overloaded right now.)

      Not nearly all, but a big chunk of the vulnerabilities can be fixed with P2P distribution. RHAT's bigger customers can be organized to help each other that way. When, for example, security emergency response times become critical, P2P will be a big boon.

      If, suddenly, all distribution of RHAT software happened P2P -- subscriptions would still have value, and that value will grow over time. Immediately, it would have value as a source of secure hashes, delivered over multiple channels. Of course it would retain its support values -- and my hope/prediction is that in the future, Red Hat Network will increase in the degree to which it is a low-walled garden "community (of customers) website": tightening and enriching the feedback loop between customers and programmers.

      -t

    8. Re:How about some ethics ? by cant_get_a_good_nick · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Welcome to the way the GPL works. RedHat knows this plenty well. This freedom is a good thing.

      Doesn't GPL allow charging for distribution? Isn't that what RedHat is doing, charing for their distribution?

    9. Re:How about some ethics ? by stratjakt · · Score: 5, Insightful

      GPL only means they have to make the source accessible, it doesnt mean they have to give away the iso with all the binaries prebuilt and all the scripts and whatnot that make it an easy-for-joe-dipshit package.

      Don't want to wait a week for all that convenience? Download all their GPL'd source and build it yourself.

      OR let's just rename it the GGGPL (gimme gimme gimme public liscense)

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    10. Re:How about some ethics ? by cant_get_a_good_nick · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Charging money for a week is no different than charging money indefinitely.
      It's no different for a week, then after it's very different.

      Jokes aside, if you charge for a week, you're charging for the early access service. If you charge indefinitely, you're charging for the product. Two very different things. In my state they'd be taxed differently, so the state calls them different.

      BitTorrent is a great tool which RedHat can use to get their bandwidth costs under control so they can focus on their core business, whatever that may be.

      I think part of their business may be charging for early access to software downloads.

      Everyone says "OpenSource is great, no need for charging for software, charge for services". Then RedHat comes out with a value add service - you can download something a bit early before being stuck in a queue, and now everyone says "no, thats not cool, we have to wait a whole WEEK."

      As far as using BitTorrent to save them bandwidth, there's nothing stopping you from using BitTorrent in a week either. The same benefits can be had a week from now without subverting a RedHat revenue stream.

      Personally, if I had a business, I'd still probably download from Redhat servers anyway, just to avoid possible trojans.

  7. Nice to see well written pieces on /. by agrounds · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is a welcome to change to the usual copy/paste from the linked articles we usually get. This is so decent it's alomst as useful as the time that guy posted the step-by-step on Gentoo that was so good I went home and installed on the spare PC. Bravo!

    Otherwise I'm glad to see the P2P community keeping pace (or should I say, one step ahead of) with the best in file serving. I'm not sure that RedHat would be pleased about it, but it was bound to happen that the ISOs would be released back to the community in record time regardless of paid subscriptions. In the end, I think they'll find it difficult to release anything without the inevitable leaks. This seems to hold true for Microsoft as well, as they contend with leak after leak of their beta and developer images. Information wants to be free!!

  8. Direct Connect by dethkultur · · Score: 4, Informative

    When will this crowd catch on to Direct Connect? Talk about non-leeching - in some hubs you have to share a minimum of 60 GB+ just to join. Yes that means those hubs average over 60GB/user. Nothing else even comes close.

    1. Re:Direct Connect by TheSHAD0W · · Score: 3, Interesting

      BT doesn't work that way. It starts uploading pieces of the file you've already downloaded, shortly after you start downloading. It's not a matter of what you're sharing, because you're only sharing the file being transferred. And everyone downloading is a contributor.

    2. Re:Direct Connect by gspr · · Score: 2, Informative

      I agree, but you're not exactly helping by posting the link to the original DC client, which is just plain hell! DC++ is an open-source client and a MUCH better alternative, imho!

  9. Bandwidth saturation? by Mistah+Blue · · Score: 5, Informative

    It would seem to me that RedHat didn't fully think out the bandwidth hit they would take. I've got a colleague (who is an RHN subscriber too) that just had all his downloads (discs 1-3) timeout. I gave up trying to start downloads this morning. I personally think, Akamai would have been a better solution.

  10. Subscriber costs by rf0 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    RedHat is a business. Business want to make money. The community support this. So therefore we get rid of their revenue streams by getting what will be free in a week now and stopping potential subscribers?

    Rus

    --
    Cheap UK and US VPS
    1. Re:Subscriber costs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This is Slashdot. Companies shouldn't be allowed to profit. Information wants to be free. Nobody reading this story ever intended to spend a single cent on this (or any) software. Good for Slashdot for sabotaging another reasonable and worthwhile revenue stream for an open source company.

  11. I thought you were right on... by Wee · · Score: 4, Interesting
    And I thought you were being sarcastic. I'm sure other people will see your post as saracastic as well. But you have a good point. Red Hat is clearly doing the pay-for-prerelease thing to make some green. If people can get it for free, then they likely will. That isn't a good thing for Red Hat.

    I personally ponied up my 60 bucks, but then again I also go out and buy boxed copies.

    -B

    --

    Ash and Hickory, straight-grained and true, make excellent bludgeons, dandy for the cudgeling of vegetarians.

    1. Re:I thought you were right on... by Pharmboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I personally ponied up my 60 bucks, but then again I also go out and buy boxed copies.

      I already pony up the 60 per year anyway, have for two years. Its a good service they provide, well worth the money.

      As to them making money, once again what I see is giving a little more to those of us that give a little more to them. I didn't like the way they marketed it, but the fact is they give alot more bandwidth to people who have NEVER given them a dime than anyone else. The GPL requires you make the source available. They COULD put all their files on a 64k throttle except for subscribers, and meet the requirements of the GPL. But they don't.

      I personally hope they do make some money, get back in the black, and gain some market share. Linux is never going to become mainstream without companies like Redhat who have somewhat viable business plans. I WANT them to be here 10 years from now, because I like their products.

      Reminds of the gag: How do you make a profit by giving stuff away?

      VOLUME!

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    2. Re:I thought you were right on... by Frymaster · · Score: 3, Interesting
      They COULD put all their files on a 64k throttle except for subscribers, and meet the requirements of the GPL

      or they could just follow the example of theo and co. from the openbsd site:

      3.3 - Does OpenBSD provide an ISO image for download?
      The OpenBSD project does not make the ISO images used to master the official CDs available for download. The reason is simply that we would like you to buy the CD sets, helping fund ongoing OpenBSD development. The official OpenBSD CD-ROM layout is copyright Theo de Raadt. Theo does not permit people to redistribute images of the official OpenBSD CDs. As an incentive for people to buy the CD set, some extras are included in the package as well (artwork, stickers etc).

      Note that only the CD layout is copyrighted, OpenBSD itself is free. Nothing precludes someone else from downloading OpenBSD and making their own CD.

      i've always thought this was a good comporomise between letting the dedicated and the geeky get what they are entitled to (the source to play with) while encouraging the moms and pops to chip into the corporate kitty. note that the price of openbsd producst is low... i think i paid $30 for the last batch of cd's i bought (and it came with stickers).

      --

      2 1337 4 u!

    3. Re:I thought you were right on... by Pharmboy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      i've always thought this was a good comporomise between letting the dedicated and the geeky get what they are entitled to (the source to play with) while encouraging the moms and pops to chip into the corporate kitty. note that the price of openbsd producst is low

      Also note that the number of systems running it are low, too, even tho it is an exceptional OS. I have no prob with them distributing it this way, but it IS part of the reason I don't use openBSD, even tho I KNOW its better for some tasks (pure web servers, for instance).

      I cut my teeth on Redhat (4.2) because I could get it free, and then when I needed service, I didn't mind paying for it. Like all distros, it has weaknesses and strengths. Its not that RH is better, its that they made it easy for me to get used to it, and eventually, prefer it. Oh, and I have messed with mandrake, solaris, lindows (really), and slackware (ug).

      While there is nothing WRONG with distributing an OS like this, it is not conducive to winning over the largest possible customer base, which is what Redhat is trying to do. Keep in mind, BSD is a very different animal anyway. BSD advocates tend to be more "purist" while Redhat tends to be more capital driven. Takes all kinds.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    4. Re:I thought you were right on... by juhaz · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They are not selling what they do not own, they are in business of selling ease of installation and configuration for those things, as well as support.

  12. And do we really *need* it? by Lysol · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Why all the effort? There have already been a couple of reviews out on 9 and it looks like it's nothing more than a little gloss over what can be had with 8. And frankly, 8 is ok, but I'm feeling my relationship is over with RedHat.

    I have been slowly, over the past year or so, warming up more and more to Gentoo. Today, in fact, I'm re-installing one of my home servers with Gentoo 1.4 because I just want it the way I want it. Gentoo is shaping up to be a great distro and if you love the days of getting your hands dirty in the depth of things, then you should give it a whirl. Altho it may not be worth it to everyone, there is something to be said about a blazingly fast distro that's tailored to your machine.

    Plus, portage smokes rpm - in fact, the BSD ports was one thing I really missed with Linux. Now, it's the best of both worlds.

  13. Working better now? by jamie · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Current download rate: 3 kB/s
    Current upload rate: 35 kB/s

    Is it running any faster now, after 15 minutes or so? My download rates shortly after the Slashdot story went live were around 5-7 K/s. Since then it's been steadily increasing -- presumably as more and more Slashdot readers download, install and run BitTorrent, providing more clients for me to connect to. I'm now up to 25-30 K/s, which is roughly the same as my upload speed.

  14. How ingeneous... by NOT-2-QUICK · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now, instead of the slashdotting the RedHat FTP sites and mirrors, the BitTorrent web site (the site distributing the client) will get the onslaught of RedHatters in search of the latest version...

    Alls well from my perspective, though -- I have already installed the BitTorrent client and have the new ISO's! As such, go nuts... :-)

    n2q

    --
    Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy. -- Benjamin Franklin
  15. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  16. Re:i used BT once... by nstrom · · Score: 3, Informative

    This is a known issue, not in BitTorrent, but in various USB DSL modem drivers and network card drivers. Linksys and Netgear have some known buggy drivers. Refer to the question titled "BitTorrent makes my machine blue screen! What should I do?" in the BitTorrent FAQ, and see http://homepage.ntlworld.com/j.buchanan/winmx/faq- restart.html for a page which also mentions this problem as it applies to WinMX, another P2P client.

  17. Make sure not to close the Bittorrent client... by RealityThreek · · Score: 5, Informative

    when the download is complete!

    Bittorent works by making everyone who downloads part of the "distribution network." By leaving the client open you are making the download go faster for everyone. I suppose this is kind of a utilitatian concept, but hey.. Slashdot readers are supposed to be idealistic, right? I'll leave mine open, and hopefully you will too.

    --
    :wq
  18. Animation works fine in Konqueror. by terkozer · · Score: 4, Informative

    quote: "Here's an animated graphic (.mng, currently viewable only in Mozilla) of a torrent transfer."

    Just to point out, the .mng works just find under Konqueror 3.1.0.

    For more information on MNG, and a list of supported browsers, follow this link

  19. Hopefully, it is faster... by cenonce · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I am a Red Hat subscriber and I am pushing a measly 14 kb/sec to download three 600+ MB ISOs. I'm on ISO #1 with 9 hours to go!

    So what exactly is the advantage of getting the distro a week ahead of everyone else when the servers for "subscriber use" are so overloaded it will take me a week to download it!?!



    1. Re:Hopefully, it is faster... by fireshipjohn · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm a subscriber too!
      And even getting the Sendmail patches today was painful...

      They have not quite got their act together,
      I'm not interested that much in V9 but Sendmail
      patches are fairly critical stuff, they need
      more than one delivery route.

      With all this and 1 year of support, I'm thinking
      of the apt-get solution...!

  20. ridiculous by the_phenom · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I find it ridiculous that the loudest linux/open source zealots in here refuse to pay to support it. Open source programmers deserve to be paid too. Put your money where your mouth is. And yes, for the record, I've paid for every version of RH since 6.x, and I even paid for Debian once. :) Let the flames begin.

    1. Re:ridiculous by mrcparker · · Score: 2, Informative

      I have a redhat network subscription and the download speeds today have been so bad that I am using bittorrent to grab the isos. RHN has been great so far, it is just that the servers are being slammed too hard today to justify waiting 36 hours for each iso.

  21. Mixed Feelings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    On the one hand, BitTorrent is an excellent way of reducing bandwidth for Open Source companies... if they release their files only on bittorrent, then they can get the distro out to more people & save money on bandwidth at the same time. In that regard, I think all Linux distro companies should adopt it.

    On the other hand, this is a massive leak for RedHat... if BitTorrent can always be relied upon to get the ISOs the day they're released to subscribers, then there is no incentive to become a RedHat subscriber... and thus RedHat loses money.

    In the future, it would be nice if BitTorrent users could wait until after the distro is released to the public before mirroring it... Yeah, then companies like RedHat still get their 1 week advance for subscribers, AND they get to not have their servers flooded on public release day.

    *sigh*... I better go buy a RH9 boxed set, I feel all dirty now.

    1. Re:Mixed Feelings by phoebus1553 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So does support not mean anything to anyone? That's part of the paying for the RHN subscription.

      --
      ----- - The beatings will continue until morale improves
  22. Actually an animated gif by SiMac · · Score: 2, Informative

    I think it's an animated gif...at least that's what it says on the page...

  23. Well you obviously don't by Tsugumi · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Ok, I use gentoo, and even I'm getting miffed with the "yeah, but why not just use gentoo" when any other distro is mentioned.

    And anyhow, RH 9 actually does include something much more than "a little gloss" - NPTL (warning - link is to a pdf)

    Now if you've ever tried to debug a core file of a multi-threaded app, or dealt with signal propagation with the old... aw, shucks never mind, but take my word for it, NPTL - woot woot

    Oh, woot woot BT too by the looks of things...

  24. Re:Download capped to around upload speed? by bramcohen · · Score: 3, Informative
    That's very complicated. BitTorrent peers use tit-for-tat to prevent leeching, which works quite well, but still results in meandering download rates. Generally speaking, you get about as much download as you provide in upload, but that can vary if there's plent of excess upload capacity, or if too many people are behind NAT, or if the original seed is slow, or a few other things.

    So the short answer is that you'll generally get better download rates if you upload more, because peers will upload to you in exchange, but your actual download rate is affected how the particular deployment is going.

  25. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  26. Re:Pretty cool! by ralphus · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Let it run for a bit. mine is about 20 minutes in on an ATTBI cable connection. 118 kB/s down, 40kB/s up.

    Redhat was giving me 8.7kB/s down before I found this article.

    --
    Revolutions are never about freedom or justice. They're about who's going to be top dog. -- Kilgore Trout
  27. The Solution is Obvious by Laven · · Score: 2, Funny

    The solution is obvious, distribute BitTorrent via BitTorrent and Slashdotting wouldn't be a problem.

    Wait a minute...

  28. Add-on freshrpms.net packages by French+Thias · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Here's a forward of an email I've sent earlier, which should please some Red Hat Linux desktop users. The sylpheed packages have been updated (the problem worked around), and the ALSA kernel modules are on their way!

    Matthias

    From: Matthias Saou
    To: RPM-List
    Subject: Red Hat Linux 9 freshrpms packages
    Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 16:11:33 +0200

    Hi all,

    Red Hat Linux 9 is here, and so are the new freshrpms.net packages!
    Of course, as the main distribution is only currenty available to RHN
    subscribers, the "os" and "updates" apt/yum modules aren't avaible yet, and
    won't be until the release actually hits the stores and public ftp servers,
    which should happen one week from now.
    The new website is:
    http://shrike.freshrpms.net/
    All relevant parts of freshrpms.net and apt.freshrpms.net have been (or are soon going to be) updated to reflect the change.

    New stuff: (*IMPORTANT*)
    - The apt server is now http://ayo.freshrpms.net/ and the paths no longer
    include "en". For the info, "ayo" stands for "apt, yum and others" ;-)
    - All files are also available through yum, although no yum package for
    Red Hat Linux 9 is currently available from freshrpms.net (soon!). See
    http://www.dulug.duke.edu/yum/ for more.
    - Some packages have had their non-relevant epoch value removed. These
    may be problematic if you decide to upgrade your system instead of
    performing a complete reinstall. The affected packages are:
    - apg
    - anjuta
    - blackbox (but was 0 anyway)
    - gentoo
    - gkrellm
    - gkrellm-plugins
    - gkrellm-themes
    - gtktalog
    - i8kutils
    - libdvdcss
    - ltris
    - proftpd
    - subtitleripper
    - xine
    The only packages with epoch set are the ones that need it in order to
    keep upgradability with older Red Hat packages.
    - The ALSA kernel modules don't work with the default Red Hat 9 kernel, so
    until a solution is available, no ALSA :-(
    - The mjpegtools won't recompile, so transcode is currently built without
    mjpeg support (required for (S)VCD IIRC).
    - The sylpheed and sylpheed-claws packages don't seem to recompile with SSL
    and produce include errors (krb5 from openssl) that I also have on
    YellowDog Linux 3.0, I'll dig into that. For now, the 8.0 binary
    packages should work fine.
    - A few packages now compile again in their latest version, most notably
    the screem web editor and the totem xine/gtk2 player.
    For the impatient ones, remember that signing up with RHN will allow you to
    support Red Hat, which is still providing us with a great (my favorite ;-))
    GNU/Linux distribution! For the others, only one week left to go... and...
    have you considered subscribing to RHN? :-)

    That's all for now, please report back to me any eventual problems, but
    most of all... have fun!
    Matthias

  29. Re:Security by Chymaera · · Score: 2, Informative

    Bittorrent's been out for over a year and has been in heavy use for a long time (it's commonly used by people downloading unlicensed, fansubbed anime, for example). It's likely that if there were any serious security exploits they would have been discovered by now, given that the source is open. It's also GPL'd, so if you're worried about security risks go check it out yourself.

  30. what changes? by AssFace · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Okay, as a user that never runs a gui on the machine, only ever goes in via ssh over the local intranet, and has a cluster of servers all behind a hardware firewall that blocks all incoming attempts...
    What is different about RedHat 9.0 that is applicable to me?

    I'm just curious if I should bother with upgrading or not - I would guess no since I can just download any one particular thing that I want/need.

    The one thing that I can think of justifying it would be that I'd like a working lm_sensors. The existing lm_sensors that it came with for me didn't have anything for my motherboard (epox 8kmm+). I'll admit it - I tried installing lm_sensors on my own and couldn't do it successfully (so much for "following the instructions").
    So were there some way that was RetardEasy to get that in... ie "upgrading" - then I'd go for it.

    Otherwise, it is just another big number jump in a short period of time that I'm not sure has any real bearing on me - yet leaves me curiously watching all those about me rush to get it.. wondering... why?

    --

    There are some odd things afoot now, in the Villa Straylight.
  31. laud this effort by jaxon6 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I laud this effort. Here's my situation: We pay for the rhn service at work. I attempt to download the 3 iso's, and I get combined download speeds of 22kB/s. This is unacceptable. I'm using BitTorrent right now, and the speed is 1900kB/s, and rising. The machine is on a 100mb/s switch, on MIT network, so I'll probably get 3mB/s before the download finishes.
    This is an example of a legal use of p2p technology directly benefitting a valid user.

    --
    Do you see the sig? Do you have it in your sights? Why yes, Miss Moneypenny...
  32. Re:MD5SUMs by Mr.Phil · · Score: 2, Informative

    400c7fb292c73b793fb722532abd09ad shrike-i386-disc1.iso
    6b8ba42f56b397d536826c78c96 79c0a shrike-i386-disc2.iso
    af38ac4316ba20df2dec5f99091 3396d shrike-i386-disc3.iso

    cut/paste directly from the md5 that dt downloaded for me

  33. Re:Serving BitTorrent files by Chymaera · · Score: 2

    Sure. Check out this.

  34. Caveat Downloader! by SIGBUS · · Score: 4, Informative
    I tried using a BitTorrent session to grab the latest Knoppix (the link was posted in yesterday's Knoppix thread). Just for kicks, I went to one of the official mirrors and checked the MD5 sum of the ISO image that I received with the MD5 sum listed on the official mirror. They did NOT match. I summarily deleted the suspect image. In retrospect, I probably should have just gone ahead and downloaded the official image, and did a file-by-file comparison.

    Basically, you should check MD5 checksums, or better yet, GPG signatures, if you're going to download a .iso from a P2P network instead of getting it from an official mirror site.

    You should check them anyway, even when you get them from an official mirror, IMHO.

    --
    Oh, no! You have walked into the slavering fangs of a lurking grue!
    1. Re:Caveat Downloader! by TheSHAD0W · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Until recently (and possibly even now), BitTorrent had a problem that often caused the completion meter to climb above 100%. (This occurred when corrupt data was received and had to be redownloaded.) As a result, many people terminated the transfer before BitTorrent had reported, "Succeeded!" Hence, corrupt files.

      On the other hand, the torrent initiator may have had a corrupt image to work with. It can happen.

      In any case, BitTorrent uses the SHA1 secure hash algorithm, which is comparable to MD5, to verify downloads. So long as the .torrent file was created by someone with a legitimate copy, the result should be just as good. Since BitTorrent is really meant to be used directly by file distributors, this shouldn't pose a problem in the future.

  35. "Funny"? by TheSHAD0W · · Score: 2, Informative

    No, really. I'm serious. There were some problems with the name server.

    As of this post, there are >1300 people downloading, and things seem to be scaling fine. The tracker ought to be able to handle at least 6000 clients.

  36. Redhat did bundle commercial software previously by maynard · · Score: 3, Informative

    >>Last I heard, the redhat cds contained proprietary software.

    >That's not true, and has never been true.

    Yes they did. For example, Redhat 4.x shipped with a commercial X server, Metro X and BRU backup tool. They also had a distribution which included Motif development libraries, as well as a secondary product line which included just the runtime libs as well as the runtime and development libs. Redhat 5.x continued shipping Metro X, but not BRU if I remember correctly. This policy was primarily a response to Caldera's bundling commercial software with the original Candera Network Desktop and Caldera OpenLinux productline. Not that Redhat Linux does bundle commercial software with the product - I haven't seen it so I can't comment on that. However, Redhat most certainly did bundle commercial applications with their product line at one point in time. --M

  37. RH = Windows by mslinux · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I use Debian GNU/Linux on PPC (Macintosh Hardware) so RH 9 matters not to me.

    However, after seeing more and more of their money grubbing ways (AS,ES and the other subscription income methods they have started lately) I downloaded bit torrent and the RH 9 ISOs to a spare box and plan to leave it up and running all week. It's on a dedicated 100Mbit ethernet line. Take that... RH Marketing bastards!

    I can remember when RH used to be fun, when it used to be for the community... those days are long gone. RH 9 will be EOL w/i no time. Why withold it from loyal users at all? Power to the people... that's what FREE software is all about. Thank you RMS! Thank you!!!

  38. Holy crap, my software got mentioned on /. !!! by Knowbuddy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Yeah, it's buried way down in the body of the article, but it's still there. w00t! I'm the guy that wrote TorrentSpy. The web site that the link points to is running on my PC at home on cable 'net access. 300 hits in 3 hours. Not too bad so far, I guess. My gf is gonna kill me if I get slashdotted, tho. There are worse ways to go, I guess ...

    I've had several people express interest in an *nix version of TSpy. It's written in Delphi, which theoretically means it shouldn't be too hard to port over to Kylix. If anyone has Kylix experience and would like to help out, feel free to contact me at the email on my web site.

    I'm gonna go tail -f my log file and listen to my network bog down.

  39. I can see the headlines now by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 2, Informative

    Thousands hacked after a trojan copy of Red Hat was placed on a bitTorrent site.

    Make sure you check the MD5, people!

    There is an MD5 available somewhere, isn't there?

  40. Quibble: There's still one left by rickmoen · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Aaron Sherman wrote:

    Check out the list of packages included with Red Hat Linux 9. You'll find exactly zero non-free software.

    Only because you brought the subject up:

    "pine 4.44 A commonly used, MIME compliant mail and news reader." This code is source-available, but licensed under proprietary terms (no right to fork).

    In pointing out this inclusion of the proprietary pine/pico/pilot package, I intend no criticism of Red Hat Software, Inc., which does it for perfectly understandable reason, given the pine MUA's wide appeal and lack of an open-source replacement acceptable to that customer base that doesn't suffer the same copyright encumbrance (as MANA does). Chris Allegretta's "nano" has nicely eliminated the pico problem, but ditching pine itself without seriously ticking off a fair number of people remains difficult.

    When I saw that Red Hat had (by the 8.0 release) reduced the number of proprietary packages to just this one -- having pushed the envelope in jettisoning the old proprietary Java packages, ditched Navigator/Communicator in favour of Mozilla and Acrobat Reader in favour of xpdf, and actually helped write a replacement for xv -- I was (and remain) quite impressed. They've shown impressive leadership, in this area.

    But it remains a (small) factual error to claim that the distribution is 100% free / open-source software.

    Rick Moen
    rick@linuxmafia.com

  41. Re:Quibble: There's still one left by ajs · · Score: 2, Interesting

    True, this is an exception. However, while I was wrong, my response was not in that the original poster was.... head ... spinning.

    What I meant to say is that the orignal claim that you could not go copying Red Hat 9 CDs because all of the software was not of the sort that you could just go copying around is simply not true. Red Hat 9 is free in that sense. It's not free in the sense that OSI requires.

    Interesting that Red Hat is not exactly open source (when installed in full) because of software I've been building from freely downloaded source for years.... heh.

    Good catch.

  42. Re:Much better than all of us rushing the FTP serv by packeteer · · Score: 2, Interesting

    My connection has a 608kbit download rate but only a 128kbit upload. My ADSL service is designed for downloading from powerful servers and NOT uploading huge amounts of data myself. So am i just screwed with BitTorrent?

    --
    unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
  43. Re:Help with BT install by stephenb · · Score: 2, Informative

    If you don't want to hassle with installing wxPython, do what I did and run the headless client. After unpacking the BitTorrent distro:

    $ cd BitTorrent-3.2.1b
    $ ./btdownloadheadless.py --url <url>

    Just cut and paste the torrent url into your terminal window.

    Worked like a charm.

  44. Re:Please post the right checksums by Xugumad · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Or, failing that, mount the CDs using loopback, and then check the signature. Something like this:

    mount -o loop shrike-i386-disc3.iso /mnt/cdrom
    rpm --checksig /mnt/cdrom/RedHat/RPMS/*.rpm

    You'll need to have downloaded the RedHat public key, which you can get from "pub/redhat/linux/8.0/en/os/i386/RPM-GPG-KEY" of your favourite RedHat mirror, and then import with a command like:

    rpm --import RPM-GPG-KEY