Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago
I'm noticing that it by the way also always shows "Remaining time unknown" for
each torrent, currently downloading or not, which seems likely to be connected,
in the sense of "things that bomb out" ...
Original comment by rene.her...@gmail.com
on 21 Apr 2014 at 7:59
Additional information: transmission's web-interface (at
http://localhost:9091/transmission/web/) reports "Downloading from X of Y
connected peers" correctly.
Original comment by rene.her...@gmail.com
on 21 Apr 2014 at 10:04
Hi,
Strange, I can't think how the download directory would matter. Does this
happen in the classic view too?
Was struggling to figure out why this might be, but think I might have found
something.
If it was compiled in debug mode, either intentionally (with ./configure
--enable-debug) or unintentionally (maybe some library #include sets -DDEBUG?,
maybe). Can you think why that might be?
In this case, the set operations on the model are done individually, and it
looks like eta and connected peers were missing from that path. This was used
quite a long time ago to help with debugging, but probably not needed anymore,
so I've disabled it.
Can you try with the latest git?
Thanks.
Original comment by a...@eth0.org.uk
on 23 Apr 2014 at 9:51
Thanks for the reply. No, this does not happen in the classic view, in the
sense that it shows non-zero entries in the "connected" column where
appropriate.
The arch versions that I'm testing with are not, intentionally, compiled in
debug mode. The arch build-scripts (the PKGBUILDs) are at:
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/tr/transmission-remote-gtk/PKGBUILD
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/tr/transmission-remote-gtk2/PKGBUILD
and are quite generic. As to unintentionally -- no, I can't think of any reason
why they would be and when browsing the source just now, I believe to have made
doubly sure that DEBUG is not defined during the build. I do tend to loose my
way around the GNU autotools fairly easily: if you would want me to make triply
sure, could you provide me with a specific spot to stick some sort of #pragma
in so as to make the build bomb out if DEBUG IS in fact defined, or something
similar?
However -- yes, I could try git. Also through the AUR by the way; there's a
helpful package at:
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/transmission-remote-gtk-git/
that checks it out of git and then builds:
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/tr/transmission-remote-gtk-git/PKGBUILD
Its "Tranmission View" shows the same behavior. Still "Downloading from X of 0
connected peers" for any value of X. Its compact view seems the same as well --
and its classic view actually bombs out: I only get a blank screen in the
classic view with the git version; a bright-white "bar" at the top, supposedly
of vertical size equal to the torrent list, and then a grey remainder of the
window.
But yes therefore, still the same behavior of the Tranmission View in current
git as in the arch package(s). Yet -- your suspicion above certainly SOUNDS
like it would be relevant (although I don't understand why supposedly not
everybody on arch is seeing this...) so I wonder. I have as said tried to make
doubly sure -- if you would like me to make triply sure, please coach as to
how... :-/
Original comment by rene.her...@gmail.com
on 23 Apr 2014 at 7:45
And by the way -- just to make sure that I wasn't looking at some very specific
issue with specific torrents, I just now started a very popular one; Linux Mint
"16":
http://torrents.linuxmint.com/torrents/linuxmint-16-cinnamon-dvd-32bit.iso.torre
nt
and am currently again looking at the status message "Downloading from 13 of 0
connected peers". That is -- I'm definitely not dreaming...
Original comment by rene.her...@gmail.com
on 23 Apr 2014 at 7:51
Mmm. Noticing that "32-bit" in the linuxmint URL, let me also make explicit
that this is on a 32-bit (x86) system, since it might in fact be the case that
THAT is starting to be rare for desktop systems...
For this to be relevant it seems there should also be some sort of
big/little-endian confusion somewhere (ie, a big-endian 64-bit long that gets
its actual value chopped off in some implicit conversion to 32-bit) which seems
rather unlikely -- but I thought I'd mention it anyway, in case it gives you an
idea.
Original comment by rene.her...@gmail.com
on 24 Apr 2014 at 6:18
Well, actually, it gave ME an idea. I applied the attached to the stock 1.1.1
version and now have a proper display of "downloading from X of Y connected
peers". I did not check if it's actually "right" in the theoretical sense,
hoping that you will; I shouldn't be spending time on my computer right now. I
also did not check if this is the only such instance of this.
But, yes, it therefore seems there's a portability issue here regarding "long
int" (32-bit on x86-32, 64-bit on x86-64) versus "long long int" (64 on both).
Original comment by rene.her...@gmail.com
on 24 Apr 2014 at 6:48
Attachments:
Excellent work! Thanks for this. This isn't the first time a mismatching type
has caused an issue on 32bit. I remember a segfault in the very early stages of
the project. Unfortunately they're really difficult to troubleshoot, as 64bit
effectively prevents the coding error from manifesting itself, but that's C for
you. :)
When I hacked the cell renderer from transmission, I changed the types to match
what's returned by json-glib, but obviously missed these printf specifications.
Was about to suggest looking at the console, I was thinking it may show a
warning about it not being within the permitted range when copying from the
model to the renderer, thereby staying at the default value.
Patch has been applied. :)
Original comment by a...@eth0.org.uk
on 24 Apr 2014 at 7:20
Actually maybe it wouldn't have showed up as a warning, as it copied from the
model to the renderer fine, it was a problem inside the gettext function.
There's quite probably not assertions for the gettext functions.
Anyway, glad this is fixed. :)
Original comment by a...@eth0.org.uk
on 24 Apr 2014 at 7:42
Lovely. And yes, eta is indeed also correct now (as per your changelog) even
though I had forgotten about that again; something about popping the correct
number of bytes of the stack during the eventual display, I suppose.
Anyways... can you do bug #260 now? :-)
Original comment by rene.her...@gmail.com
on 24 Apr 2014 at 7:48
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
rene.her...@gmail.com
on 21 Apr 2014 at 7:40