I don't know much about the practicality of using bit torrent downloads, and today, for me, such practicality is in doubt. Twice I've downloaded the kubuntu-9.04-desktop-i386.iso from http://torrent.ubuntu.com:6969/, and twice, using K3B to do the checksum, the check has failed.
Is this a common experience? Are bit torrent downloads for ISOs a bad idea? (I'm using Ktorrent to do the download). Anything I can do differently to get better results
I HAVE done this successfully in the past, and I've also found that non-bit-torrent downloads, even over broadband, can take many hours, so I'm trying to avoid that.
AN UPDATE:
After the apparent cksum failure on the first download, I did it again, and got another failure, as related above. However, the cksum for the second APPEARED to be a lot like the first, which since I had deleted it was no longer available.
I downloaded a third time, and failed again. But...note this
537a22de1342d5671b7e0070f66a6076 <= second cksum
537a22de1342d5671b7e0070f66a6076 <= third cksum
According the the ubuntu bit torrent download page, the cksum should be -
7ac58d795d78700f582fe5e39a795a5ecd465f45
Could this be wrong?
Any ideas regarding what I might do at this point?
Is this a common experience? Are bit torrent downloads for ISOs a bad idea? (I'm using Ktorrent to do the download). Anything I can do differently to get better results
I HAVE done this successfully in the past, and I've also found that non-bit-torrent downloads, even over broadband, can take many hours, so I'm trying to avoid that.
AN UPDATE:
After the apparent cksum failure on the first download, I did it again, and got another failure, as related above. However, the cksum for the second APPEARED to be a lot like the first, which since I had deleted it was no longer available.
I downloaded a third time, and failed again. But...note this
537a22de1342d5671b7e0070f66a6076 <= second cksum
537a22de1342d5671b7e0070f66a6076 <= third cksum
According the the ubuntu bit torrent download page, the cksum should be -
7ac58d795d78700f582fe5e39a795a5ecd465f45
Could this be wrong?
Any ideas regarding what I might do at this point?
Comment