Problems V. 2.9.8 - 'Could Not Download'
 

There is a definite problem with 2.9.8. From the moment I updated, 95% of downloads result in a 'Could not Download' message. Everything used to work very well, now it doesn't. Nothing else changed on my machine, running OSX 10.2.4. Anyone know where to get an older version of software?

Comparative experience
 

Hi

For what it's worth, my money says you were just lucky before. From my view of the system, there has been no substantive change in the means of performance as we adopted each new upgrade. The developers are merely tinkering with the package, making small incremental amendments rather than major amendments. I have only averaged about a 5% success rate of attempted connections but, once connected, I have worked to achieve a high download success rate since adopting LW. I am content with life under the current 2.9.8 on OSX 10.2.4 and would see little point in going back to an earlier version. In earlier threads, I have seen references to addresses for ealier versions. If you are determined to step back, browse through the back catalogue of advice.

'Could Not Download'
 

Luck? Hah! Look around these forums my friend and you will see many MANY people are having problems with 2.9.8. I've been using LW for over a year with excellent results, I was certainly maintaining far better than your reported 5% connection success before this version. If you asked me to guess, I would say more like 25%. I almost never had a download attempt fail once commmenced, and the connections would remain stable and available for many many hours. Many downloads later, I was astonished how well it worked. But with no major OS changes (although perhaps it may have something to do with Apple's latest Java update?), something definitely broke in 2.9.8. The problem is definitely associated with connection reliability and duration - hosts rarely seem to hang around for longer than maybe 20 seconds now.

Re: 'Could Not Download'
 

Most of the download problems I'm seeing here seem to be psychological. It was the same with uploads and downloads going into the "Connecting..." mode every 100k. People came here and complained their connections weren't stable (although the tcp connection was kept alive all the time).

Still Can't Download
 

I too just updated to v2.9.8 I've only had 1 successful download. Everything else is could not download. I quess its true when they say if it ain't broke don't fix it. Some help would be appreciated.

Interesting comparative experiences
 

I have only been using LW for two months. I have not enjoyed your Indian Summer of easy downloads. For me, a 5% success rate for connection (not downloads) is normal. So let us take your perception as correct (despite trap_laws' defensive dismissal) and ask what has changed. As I understand it, more people with excess bandwidth are now serving as ultrapeers through default. This has applied to me for the last week since upgrading to 2.9.8.

I have casually monitored the connect volumes and, rather than see highly stable traffic, I have found it fluctuating wildly. Why should that be? Although I work on my machine for long periods of time (LW operation does not survive sleep), I have the impression that a reasonably high percentage of users are transient. If even a small percentage of the ultrapeer network are casual, this must be highly disruptive to the routing system of the whole network. Further, I have found that my LW crashes on a fairly regular basis in ultrapeer mode. I suspect that there is a memory problem that slowly builds to a saturation point during each on-line session.

I speculate that the increase in poor connectivity and lost downlaods that you have remarked is due to traffic disruption as a higher percentage of the ultrapeer system is distributed among less stable ultrapeer hosts. It must be a balancing act for the designers/developers. The network cannot grow unless there are sufficient ultrapeers. That some of the new ultrapeers are transient is the price to be paid for overall p2p growth.

My apologies if my speculation is rubbish but I am only slowly coming to understand what may be going on and would value your opinion so that we may all learn.

"Could Not Download; Awaiting Sources ...
 

boy, am i glad i decided to take a look around here. i thought it was strange that after i successfully downloaded and installed the upgrade (v 2.9.8), i started having this problem. a file would connect and begin to download and stop with the 'status' of 'Could Not Download; Awaiting Source ...'.
if i quit, re-launch, and re-search ... i can start the process all over again, sometimes it completes, and sometimes it doesn't. i have to say that i shooting about 10% (if that).
i placed a 'bug report' ... anyone else?
i'm running mac 10.2.5, i don't think it's just an os x issue.
i'm just glad to know that i'm not the only one. thank you to those of you who post.
do you think the last version is floating around the network?
peace.

Anybody else seeing "could not move to library"? This was an old issue, but I'm seeing too many since the 10.2.5 upgrade. I reparired permissions several times, and noted some "temp" directory getting more attention.

Does LW use temp directories before the chunks are written to the incomplete folder, and might a timeout be involved in the process of downloading and writing the chunks that's triggering the error messages?

I'm pretty busy right now--can anyone suggest how we can test for this? There are so many variables, but there does seem to be an OSX problem here.

LimeWire does not use another directory for temporary files besides the "Incomplete" directory.

If there was an error writing the chunks LimeWire won't show a "Couldn't Move To Library" error. This error will be shown, if the incomplete file could not be created in the "Incomplete" directory, if LimeWire could not move the completed file to the shared directory or if the incomplete file could not be opened.

There are no timeouts when writing the file.

Thanks. Makes sense. Probably just a bad source. Any suggestions for clearing whatever sources LW has built up, and avoiding getting new ones? I guess I could ungroup results and block all older clients.

I don't know how OSX handles files in d/l progress, so if LW doesn't use temps, maybe the OS interferes. Most apps I install use the OSX installer, and they usually asks for admin perms before installing.

Cannot move to library
 

This has definitely become more common. It seems to arise in two quite different situations:

as a specific and immediate response to some hosts when a download connection is attempted (often, without going through the "connection" routine). It is more usually the first response but sometimes it comes when attempting subsequent downloads from a host following a browsing (in this latter case, I speculate that it is a reaction to exceeding the host's download limit since it cuts off all current downloads from that host). Once I get this response, no amount of fiddling will change the reaction — the source is forever "bad"; and

if I am cycling too quicky between kill and continue for stalled downloads — I speculate that the command to recall the incomplete file for continued downloading fails to reopen the incomplete file in time to accept new data (at least this problem can usually be cleared by refreshing the search).

Confirming Problems V. 2.9.8 - 'Could Not Download'
 

This is to confirm that the apparently widespread observation of excessive "Cannot download..." events in the new 2.9.8 was immediately noticed here too, right after installing. Our experience was identical to the other descriptions herein, and after a few minutes we recieved a warning window instructing us to e-mail the displayed error message to bugs@limewir...etc. We got an automated response saying, basically, "Thanks for the report" and referring us to this forum for support. We hope moral support isn't the only kind they have.

The Network might want to look into this because it seems like a bug that impairs functionality, and by the time one discovers it, they've already blown-out their older, functional version (or have they? Is there a way to restore the uninstalled 2.8.6?).

Instant frustration cannot be good for voluntary network connectivity. The least they might do is temporarily re-offer the old, better software for download so people don't burn-out on using it: we're about to if we can't fix it.

Anyway, we have the same question: how do we get the old 2.8.6 software back?

The "Could Not Download; Awaiting Sources" messages is not caused by a bug. It's the intended response to a failed download that replaced the "requery sent, waiting for results" message.

The upcoming LW 3.0 (and possibly all future versions) will behave similarly. Returning to LW 2.8.6 will not improve your situation on the long run, because it's not really compatible to the new search architecture.

LimeWire 2.8.6 will try to requery for failed downloads but those searches are now dropped by newer ultrapeers. So although you don't get the "Could Not Download" message, your situation will not have changed.

Could Not Download ... whatever.
 

it may be a only 'name change', but since upgrading it's been happening more often.
i've never been dropped this much.
peace.

Even if that was the case, it doesn't seem to have anything to do with the new version itself.

The link
 

You asked so here it is, LimeWire all downloads page.

Thanx for the link.... I re-downloaded 2.9.6 and the difference is incredible..... 2.9.8 definitely has some compatability problems.

could not download, awaiting sources
 

Well it's nice to see that I am not the only mac user with this problem, which I believe started once I upgraded to the newest version. The problem has, unfortunately, become worse, and I am now very rarely able to download anything. I currently have a 2% success rate. I have read the posting here and have become overwhelmed with the different opinions and justifications for the apparent degadation of the new version of LW.

I have only one question concerning this isue: How do I fix it?

Whether I should try to find an old version, re-install the new version or simply wait for LM 3 is a mystery to me.

If anyone has been able to overcome this, I would love to hear about your success.

What Can I Do?
 

Hi Spidermann

Sadly, I don't think the remedy lies in any one person's hands. This does not appear to be a problem with Macs. It is a general traffic management problem in a network of interconnected machines in dynamic flux. All we need to do is to reduce the number of users accessing Gnutella, have everyone use the most recent software and then get everyone to act act with a sense of communal responsibility. As it is, the problem is apparently aggravated by the way Morpheus interrogates the network (I trust that postings in other forums on this topic are accurate) and by the habit of multiple searching. It may be that you will achieve a short-term advantage in going back to an earlier version but this relief can only be temporary. As each new upgrade comes along, more of the older versions will be cut out of the loop. So I think there are two morals to this story:

ain't no such thing as a free lunch (at some point, there has to be payment for results through the input of effort by each user); and

adapt or die — if you don't want to play with Gnutella anymore, give it up.

Wow, you make sense!
 

Dear david 91

Though the news does not appear to be promising, I truly appreciate your concise points in respone to my queries(more than I had hoped for). Your forthcoming responses have, in fact, helped me to realize the error of my ways.

But to this I say: The word quit is not in my vocabulary, I will adapt...then I'll have lunch.

Thank you.

P.S. How is the weather?

Well done Spidermann
 

I am pleased and relieved that you have some of your Hero's blood in your veins. I suspect the problems are going to get worse before they get better so you'd better batten down the hatches to keep that lunch of your's dry while you eat it.

But seriously, you can improve performance even in these difficult times if you take a positive approach to the problems. Experiment on your own and read round these threads (nuggets of useful advice buried in these here hills).

And the weather here is to die for which, given the current paranoia over the SARS outbreak, is not to be taken too literally.

"Could not download..."
 

I am glad to hear that other people are having this issue. I just got a download to work and I've had way less than the purported 5% rate. Limewire used to be the best mac sharing program around. Now it just sux.

Hi there
 

You did not understand my earlier post on this topic. This is not a LimeWire problem. This is a Gnutella problem. Think of it this way: a small group of people get together and they all interconnect and have fun. Then thousands of other people hear there's this good thing going and they all come along to join. That would not be so bad except that the majority now using the network are takers and not true sharers. So, to keep all these interconnections going, a substantial amount of the bandwidth is taken up in connection traffic. Then, some of the Gnutella applications themselves are antisocial and generate multiple searches which overloads much of what is left of the bandwidth. To add to the problem of overcrowding, many of the users are not interested in sharing so they maximise the download speed and minimise the upload speed in their preferences (the speed of data exchange between two hosts is always at the slower speed). And they only stay on-line for short periods of time and then log off while half the world is downloading from them. I could go on with the bad news but there is little point. The Limewire developers are trying to make changes which will appear in 3.0 that will reduce the traffic and restore some of the efficiency that used to prevail. But this can only be a firefighting exercise given that Gnutella itself is grinding to a halt. I suspect that the days of happy downloading you used to enjoy are gone for ever. And, just to confirm my own performance levels, I find that only about 5% of hosts allow connections and, of that 5%, I probably get half downloaded on a good day. In a bad session, I get no complete downloads. But, since I've only been using Limewire for two months, I've known no better. As of today, I've downloaded 1474 complete files. How are you doing?