Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Shareaza 2.0 Released Under GPL

timothy posted more than 10 years ago | from the runs-under-whatnow? dept.

Software 321

RageEar writes "Today it was announced that the latest version of Shareaza, a popular P2P application for Windows, was released under the GPL. Currently the source code is hosted by the Shareaza servers, but the announcement makes mention of the code becoming a project on Sourceforge. The binaries are still available for Windows only, but I imagine it is only a matter of time before a Linux port emerges."

cancel ×

321 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Hurrah (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9316900)

I love shareaza, but wish it came with peerguardian built in. (Yes, I know you can import it into the security block but that should be automatic)

Better? (0, Troll)

superpulpsicle (533373) | more than 10 years ago | (#9316905)

Is this thing better than Gnutella, Kazaa or some other P2P software. Better yet does this software handle spyware issues better? I don't think there is enough patches to go around patching my already over-patched system.

Re:Better? (4, Informative)

xsupergr0verx (758121) | more than 10 years ago | (#9316927)

No spyware, uses Gnutella2, Bittorrent, and eDonkey2k network. Pretty killer little toy.

Re:Better? (2, Interesting)

hawkbug (94280) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317024)

Yes, but does it encrypt the data stream so people can't spy on what your download? If not, it's still just another file sharing app people won't use.

Re:Better? (5, Informative)

xsupergr0verx (758121) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317121)

You don't get busted for downloads, you get busted for uploads. The program has an option to turn off all uploads (even of partial files.)

Very useful for me, as in the last year I recieved two "friendly letters" from the BSA and MPAA respectively.

Re:Better? (3, Informative)

darth_MALL (657218) | more than 10 years ago | (#9316942)

Not too sure if this is what you were asking, but I think spyware is a non-issue with Sharezaa. This is from the PR:
"it made some important technical improvements, broke some new ground with an original P2P network, "upped the ante" with many of its competitors and probably contributed to the growing trend away from "heavy spyware bundling".

Re:Better? (3, Informative)

smd4985 (203677) | more than 10 years ago | (#9316975)

Shareaza is definitely no better than Gnutella (LimeWire performs much better). Shareaza has a nice interface but downloads are iffy and the client is very buggy. Seems like the move to GPL is a desperate attempt to catch up to LimeWire (which has been open source for a while and making amazing strides).

Re:Better? (2, Funny)

xsupergr0verx (758121) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317030)

Very true, it's use of Gnutella is pretty lame. However, this is easily my favorite ed2k program and I adore the bittorrent throttling settings (I had a linksys card that overheated using BT once!)

Re:Better? (5, Insightful)

sabNetwork (416076) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317283)

I beg to differ. Have you ever tried Shareaza? I am not affiliated with either project, and I must say that Shareaza blows other Gnutella clients out of the water.

* The user interface is unmatched, at least on the Windows platform.
* Performance-- LimeWire and Kazaa both suck the crap out of your CPU.
* Support for multiple protocols
* Plugin functionality

The biggest benefit of Shareaza going open source is the inevitable addition of a FastTrack plugin.

Re:Better? (4, Informative)

Tweaker_Phreaker (310297) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317365)

LimeWire is a great Gnutella program but that's all it is (Shareaza supports four protocols) and it still lacks lots of features that Shareaza has like ghost ratings (tells people about bad files that you've deleted) and the ability to ignore ID3 tags while hashing (even if people change their ID3 tags, it will still have the same hash).

Also, Shareaza's Gnutella performence isn't too great because:
1) Its Gnutella code hasn't been updated much because Mike (Shareaza's creator) seems to want everyone to use 'Gnutella 2' instead and he's been busy adding lots of features into Shareaza.
2) Shareaza is only a Gnutella Leaf node and depends on other clients to be the Ultrapeers but most Gnutella clients started to give preference to their own kind (ie. LimeWire mostly only connects to other LimeWire clients) even though it goes against their own ideology.

Re:Better? (1)

y2imm (700704) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317034)

For what it's worth, I've been using Shareaza for about a year now, having tried Limewire et al, and finding them wanting in their interfaces. No spyware either.

anybody compiled it yet (2, Interesting)

jonasmit (560153) | more than 10 years ago | (#9316906)

on Linux/BSD? Do any ports currently exist?

Re:anybody compiled it yet (1)

numbski (515011) | more than 10 years ago | (#9316922)

I would imagine not....unless it builds nicely using winelib.

I onlly have MacOS X in front of me, and I don't have winelib on here, so I can't try it on here. Anyone else? :P

Re:anybody compiled it yet (5, Informative)

Izago909 (637084) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317048)

Last time I checked in it was built on .NET. I'm not sure if that's the case anymore, but if it is, some serious revisions must be made before it's truly cross platform.

Re:anybody compiled it yet (0)

sameb (532621) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317066)

Don't even bother. You've already got a free, open-source p2p app for all the platforms you could ever want, using LimeWire (written in Java).

Re:anybody compiled it yet (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9317148)

Correct, LimeWire rocks... though I wish it was written in SWT instead of Swing.

(Uh oh) :)

Re:anybody compiled it yet (1)

Short Circuit (52384) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317204)

Last I heard, LimeWire was Java though not Open Source. Phex is both, though.

Re:anybody compiled it yet (4, Informative)

sameb (532621) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317223)

LimeWire is (and has been for the past 4 years) open source -- GPL'd and all.

Re:anybody compiled it yet (1)

Short Circuit (52384) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317271)

Heh. Shows how long I've been out of the loop, doesn't it?

Re:anybody compiled it yet (3, Insightful)

Chyeld (713439) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317309)

Except of course, Limewire only handles one of the many protocols that Sharezilla does. Thus reducing the argument to "don't even bother, you can do 10% of what Sharezilla does with this other bloated Java app."

Re:anybody compiled it yet (5, Insightful)

sameb (532621) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317350)

You can do 100% of what Shareaza tries to do with LimeWire -- that is, search for and download files. The network it runs on is implementation details. You can in fact say that Shareaza is bloated for adding support for multiple networks instead of making one network work as good as it possibly can.

Bram Cohen has complained that Shareaza's BitTorrent implementation is terrible. Gnutella developers have complained that Shareaza's Gnutella implementation is outdated & that it wrongly sends tons of "Gnutella2" packets to clients that don't want them.

Would you prefer a client that picks a goal and makes it work amazingly well, or a client that tries to do lots of things so-so?

If it is based on .Net (1)

Orion Blastar (457579) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317262)

There may be a way to port it using Mono?

Re:anybody compiled it yet (1)

Sweetshark (696449) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317364)

Why should anybody? (Beyond the "because I can"-nature of geeks)
There are far superior p2p-clients for Linux available: mldonkey [mldonkey.org] for example supports donkey, overnet, fasttrack, gnutella, directconnect, soulseek, opennap, bittorrent, http, ftp and ssh file transfers. And it has a webinterface and multiple GUI-clients (Linux and Windows) available ...
They might get some ideas by looking at the Shareaza sourcecode for improvements though.

somebody call my sponsor (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9316910)

Crap, I thought I was finally done with porn.

a message from the riaa (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9316915)

when you use file sharing apps the terrorists win

Re:a message from the riaa (5, Funny)

the_riaa (669835) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317083)

Stop speaking for us, idiot. [That's our job.] -the riaa

Re:a message from the riaa (3, Funny)

Patrik_AKA_RedX (624423) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317149)

when you use file sharing apps the terrorists win
No, the terrorists win if they can plant the bomb and the counter-terrorist can't disarm it in time, or if they can kill all the counter-terrorists.

do we really want OSS P2P apps? (4, Interesting)

musikit (716987) | more than 10 years ago | (#9316919)

don't get me wrong... i am all for OSS. i run linux and mac etc. however if the wire protocol is open wouldn't it be easier for RIAA/MPAA/USGOV/ISPs to look at the data and block certain traffic/file names to "cover their own ass" or have evidence to prosecute you?

musikit equips tin-foil hat.

Re:do we really want OSS P2P apps? (3, Insightful)

yokimbo (525881) | more than 10 years ago | (#9316973)

Wouldn't it be easier, as OSS, to thwart RIAA/etc attemps to mess with it. When you've got a determined community vs RIAA, I'm in favor of OSS.

Re:do we really want OSS P2P apps? (5, Insightful)

BiggsTheCat (460227) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317013)

Well, Shareaza's protocols were already open; the Gnutella network spec and eDonkey network spec are already documented, even if the code isn't available.

The big boys generally don't look at the data coming over the wire since it's too much of a hassle. It's far easier if they actually participate in the network and then watch who downloads from them.

If you're really paranoid about it, though, you could engineer some crypto into the networks... assuming you can trust your peers and they agree to the same crypto. Security by obscurity of protocol rarely works.

Re:do we really want OSS P2P apps? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9317264)

It's far easier if they actually participate in the network and then watch who downloads from them.

Wouldn't that make my downloads legal, since I'm downloading with the copyright owner's permission :) ?

What I think many people miss is that you don't get in trouble for downloading, but for uploading. They participate in the network and watch who's making stuff available that they own copyrights to

Just trying to clear up this (very common) misconception...

Re:do we really want OSS P2P apps? (1, Offtopic)

eldacan (726222) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317016)

Given that mldonkey [mldonkey.org] is here, open-source and implements most of the P2P protocols, this release will not make a big difference.

By the way, mldonkey is really a great project! Its client-server approach is very handy to download in the background and control downloads remotely.

Re:do we really want OSS P2P apps? (1)

alexo (9335) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317211)

I tried running mldonkey twice (admittedly, win32 platforms) and both times it killed all internet access on the machine.

Re:do we really want OSS P2P apps? (4, Insightful)

sameb (532621) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317039)

You'd prefer security through obscurity?

Open source clients & protocols, like LimeWire (on Gnutella) have made huge advances in the level of file-sharing, forcing other proprietary apps to play catch-up (and, in this case, probably playing a big part in making Shareaza go open source).

The same logic behind wanting voting machines & encryption schemes to be open source applies to wanting p2p networks & clients as open source.

Re:do we really want OSS P2P apps? (1)

GoPlayGo (541427) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317051)

Security through obscurity is no security.

Mod parent down. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9317060)

Why do the moderators mod crap up like this. Moderators reveal yourselves now!

Small correction (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9317101)

don't get me wrong... i am all for OSS. i run linux and mac etc.

Just a little correction. MacOS is not open source or free software.

Re:do we really want OSS P2P apps? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9317123)

Gnutella is already an open standard

Re:do we really want OSS P2P apps? (0, Flamebait)

Saeed al-Sahaf (665390) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317220)

if the wire protocol is open wouldn't it be easier for RIAA/MPAA/USGOV/ISPs to look at the data and block certain traffic/file names to "cover their own ass" or have evidence to prosecute you?

If you're not doing anything wrong, than you have nothing to worry about.

Re:do we really want OSS P2P apps? (1)

Alwin Henseler (640539) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317256)

Sure, P2P apps can be useful, and the platform/OS you run them on shouldn't really matter.

But I can think of at least a couple of reasons to want OSS versions: Think the same reasons we use OSS in the first place. And for another, ridding yourself of that spyware shit that comes with many P2P filesharing progs for W*n***s

I wonder (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9316921)

omg first pr0ssssssssst!

So... (0)

MoneyT (548795) | more than 10 years ago | (#9316923)

Does this mean the program is about to get better or worse now that everyone can put their hands on the code, because last I used it shareazza was shitty as hell, and wouldn't let me turn off outgoing streams when I wanted to.

Re:So... (1)

BiggsTheCat (460227) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317049)

It means that if you don't like the way it works, the onus is on you to fix it the way you like. You can't just blame the company anymore.

Wow (5, Funny)

Nascar_Geek (682890) | more than 10 years ago | (#9316930)

And Worst Program Name of the Year goes to: These guys - for "Shareaza"

Re:Wow (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9317224)

Not to mention that the app itself is just as crappy. I was hoping to hear that Shareaza was to be abandoned and forgotten, but no such luck.

Re:Wow (1)

DrEldarion (114072) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317301)

Which is exactly why they made it open source. Their software sucks so they need help from outsiders.

Re:Wow (2, Interesting)

lordDallan (685707) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317352)

I always thought the name was a play on Scheherazade, the heroine from "The Book of One Thousand and One Nights" [wikipedia.org] .

Kind of like she told a thousand stories, there are a thousand (metaphorically) adventures in P2P downloading awaiting you, oh humble user.

Linux port (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9316931)

Cool, so finally I can get all the eyecandy and visual effects of Linux mixed with stability and performance of WinXP.

Nice Thought, but... (0, Troll)

Nuclear Elephant (700938) | more than 10 years ago | (#9316937)

Can Windows users really be trusted with source code? I mean look what happened to Windows when that service pack code got out - it became a completely crappy piece of...oh wait...can Windows developers really be trusted with source code?

And Soon... (2, Interesting)

Azureflare (645778) | more than 10 years ago | (#9316940)

NOT on sourceforge.net. As soon as the DMCA notices arrive at sourceforge, it'll be taken down.

This should be quite interesting to watch. Personally, I stopped using P2P apps because there's nothing I want these days. Also, I got one of those friendly notices from the MPAA, and I realized, that it seriously wasn't worth it.

Any software I want, there's a free alternative for linux. None of the music that is coming out now interests me, so this p2p app is completely unappealing.

Re:And Soon... (4, Informative)

Otto (17870) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317018)

Shareaza doesn't do anything illegal. Doesn't contain any copyrighted code. There's no basis for a DMCA notice. It's just a P2P application, like many others that are also on sourceforge.

You miss the point (1)

Azureflare (645778) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317091)

Sourceforge isn't going to debate that. If the DMCA notice arrives, they'll shut it down. Do you think they have the money/legal team to defend against lawsuits/questionable issues? I'm sure we all agree that the DMCA/lawsuits shouldn't be used against P2P apps. But we need the money to argue back...

Re:You miss the point (4, Insightful)

Otto (17870) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317263)

If the DMCA notice arrives...

There's no *basis* upon which they can send a DMCA takedown notice.

A DMCA takedown notice states, under penalty of perjury that the material in question is copyright infringing material and is owned by whomever is sending the notice.

Sending a DMCA notice to someone is a legal document stating that the material you're bitching about is, in fact, owned by you or somebody you represent. If you don't in fact own that material, you just committed perjury and can be held liable for that.

If somebody were so stupid as to send SF a DMCA notice for Shareaza, which is *known* to have been entirely written by this one guy who's putting it out there (he wrote it from scratch, he should know), then they'd be liable for a pretty easy countersuit.

It won't be taken down anytime soon, methinks.

Re:And Soon... (1)

danigiri (310827) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317062)

Correct me if I'm wrong but..., do the very P2P programs themselves violate any of the DMCA stuff?

I think not, last time I checked giFT [sourceforge.net] was available...

Now that I mention it, wouldn't it be more easier/feasible/comfortable to just write a plugin for giFT? To avoid and get rid of crappy WIND32 UI mannerisms, avoid GUI porting and just fire Poisoned (or whatever) away?

dani++

Anonymous moderation (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9317180)

-1, Spineless

Re:And Soon... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9317191)

You mean like emule and those many bittorrent clients?
They are on sourceforge and not taken down...

Re:And Soon... (1)

tunabomber (259585) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317201)

NOT on sourceforge.net. As soon as the DMCA notices arrive at sourceforge, it'll be taken down.

Yeah, except FreeNet [sourceforge.net] is still alive and kicking on SourceForge, despite all the publicity it's gotten. So is DC++ [sourceforge.net] . There are also many other filesharing apps hosted on SF that I won't even take the time to name.
About the only thing Shareaza has to worry about is getting its donation box shutdown by PayPal [slashdot.org] . -If they plan to have a donation box, that is.

Re:And Soon... (2, Interesting)

bigberk (547360) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317238)

Any software I want, there's a free alternative for linux. None of the music that is coming out now interests me, so this p2p app is completely unappealing.
I agree with what you say. In the *NIX world, all the software we need is free. I don't need to buy from $corp, in fact I don't even need to steal from $corp. My desktop Linux installation is compatible with my hardware, and works fine.

Pop music has been a big disappointment for me, so now I only listen to my campus radio stations. I don't buy CDs from $industry, and I don't download their music online. The $industry registers lost CD sales as Internet piracy, so they're either ignorant or deceptive. Either way... they're screwed in the long run if many do what I'm doing.

I think this is the appropriate way to have an impact. It's legal, ethical, and even healthy for capitalism.

Re:And Soon... (1)

Chyeld (713439) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317339)

You've obviously never searched for P2P on Sourceforge, have you? HINT: Sharezilla won't be lonely.

That's funny (5, Funny)

writertype (541679) | more than 10 years ago | (#9316945)

Because every time my friend uses Shareaza, he tells me that there's quite a bit of other content GPLed there too: music, games, movies...

Shareaza 2.0: Open Source (4, Informative)

Compholio (770966) | more than 10 years ago | (#9316947)

Not to be cruel, but what makes Shareaza so cool that someone would go to the trouble to port it when we already have gtk-gnutella (http://gtk-gnutella.sourceforge.net/) that supports Shareaza?

Re:Shareaza 2.0: Open Source (5, Informative)

athakur999 (44340) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317131)

A quick look at gtk-gnutella's page shows that it only supports Gnutella. Shareaza supports EDonkey, BitTorrent, and it's own Gnutella2 as well, and can swarm your download across all four networks.

notaFirst Post (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9316958)

notaFirst Post
no Post
yes Post
not Post
i think so Post

Yessssssssss
noooooooooooooo

Damn That Filter

Great! (1)

alokeb (764754) | more than 10 years ago | (#9316961)

Yet another way of getting your ass busted by RIAA!!

Winelib. (3, Informative)

numbski (515011) | more than 10 years ago | (#9316967)

I know what everyone's thinking right now.

d00dz! Build it for [Linux|*BSD|OSX]!

Either lots of recoding needs to be done, or if you're REALLY lucky, it'll build using Winelib.

I'd be interested to know if the latter works. ;)

Remote access (5, Interesting)

xsupergr0verx (758121) | more than 10 years ago | (#9316972)

A new, very comprehensive "remote web access" feature allows full remote control of Shareaza's searches, downloads, uploads and networks from any web browser.
That's what I am most excited for. Checking your downloads and searches while out of town for a few days or at school. Very useful indeed

Re:Remote access (2, Informative)

NiteHaqr (29663) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317063)

Try the following combination

Linux
SSH
screen
btdownloadcurses

Been doing it for ages........

Re:Remote access (1)

xsupergr0verx (758121) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317168)

eMule support?

Re:Remote access (4, Funny)

garcia (6573) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317085)

Checking your downloads and searches while out of town for a few days or at school. Very useful indeed.

Mostly for claiming that it was someone else that used your computer to do all that illegal downloading, not you. Right?

Re:Remote access (1)

liquidflare (463694) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317096)

yes! scott don't deny it

Azureus (1)

Fuzzy_Nuts (740151) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317128)

The Azureus Java Bit Torrent client allready has an add on for remote webadmin http://azureus.sourceforge.net/plugin_details.php? plugin=webui

Re:Remote access (1)

dabadab (126782) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317261)

MLDonkey (an E-Donkey 2000 client) had web and a telnet interface for ages.
(The telnet port is bound to localhost, so it is accessible only locally (so it is not a big, gaping sec. hole))

giFT (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9317361)

giFT [sf.net] also has a client/server architecture. Try these easy steps:

1) Run giftd.
2) run one of the many clients on many platforms (including web) to attach to the server.
3) ???
4) Profit!

API (2, Insightful)

KoriaDesevis (781774) | more than 10 years ago | (#9316977)

If the API used by P2P apps is open and documentation for it is readily available on the net (e.g. Gnutella protocol), does releasing this app as open source really prove much? The original Gnutella's source is still available and I would think this would be simpler to follow (was more of a simplistic implementation)...

Hey, I won't argue with making it OpenSource, I think it's a positive thing either way. In this case, though, I don't see too much benefit if the goal is to create spinoffs. If the goal is to have community recommendations, that might be a little more beneficial...

Re:API (1)

betelgeuse-4 (745816) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317288)

Community bug-fixes would be very helpful. Although Shareaza was a good program when I last used it, there were some problems with the BT implementation.

Excellent! (4, Informative)

Otto (17870) | more than 10 years ago | (#9316984)

Now, hopefully, someone can fix the whacked out BitTorrent implementation.

It works okay, but the way it uses the temporary files is just wonky. It downloads everything into a temporary file and then splits or copies the file when it's completed downloading. While this is fine in theory, in practice the problem is that the act of the splitting/copying is heavy on drive use, slows the whole system down, and generally is a PITA to deal with. Furthermore this makes it difficult to use other BT clients with the files, if you happen to want to use a different client in the middle of a download. You have to manually split the temp file apart using a separate tool or manually create a temporary file for Shareaza to use for the torrent.

Why it can't use the standard create the files as you go method I don't know. I think it's because he just worked the protocol into raza using the existing codebase like the temporary files.

Wow (-1, Redundant)

Nascar_Geek (682890) | more than 10 years ago | (#9316987)

And Worst Program Name of the Year goes to:

These guys - for "Shareaza"

Shareaza is great... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9317005)

I have used Shareaza for over a year and it has yet to fail me. It's the best winxp gnutella client and has great edonkey and bittorrent support. However, I would strongly suggest that windows users use another client for those services. It's a great program for people who are new to p2p.

This has been a long time coming... (1)

sgtsanity (568914) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317006)

Ever since the first few releases, people have been bugging Mike about releasing Shareaza as an open-source client. I guess he finally caved in. Now to use Shareaza to download... linux distros. Lots of ... linux distros!

MLDonkey (4, Informative)

ptaff (165113) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317007)

Before you consider trying Shareaza, have a peek at MLDonkey [nongnu.org] . A nice multi-interface multi-protocol project done in Python that supports all that Shareaza supports and more.

WRONG (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9317152)

MLDonkey is written in Ocaml! Not in python...

Re:MLDonkey (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9317156)

Not true, mldonkey is done in Ocaml [inria.fr] .

Re:MLDonkey (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9317187)

In Python ? I thought it was in Ocaml...

Re:MLDonkey (1)

mmport80 (588332) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317230)

But the GUI sucks. giFt (with the fastrack plugin) and apollon kick ass.

Re:MLDonkey (1)

ptaff (165113) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317244)

OCaml indeed, my bad.

Must wish unconsciously it was made in Python :)

Re:MLDonkey (1)

GargoyleMT (9723) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317327)

Sure, but MLDonkey isn't usable on at least one of those networks: DirectConnect. Some MLDonkey versions report 11 megabyte shares, but don't let users download the file list. It seems the MLDonkey DC core needs some attention.

Re:MLDonkey (1)

Turmio (29215) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317378)

MLDonkey written in OCAML [inria.fr] , not Python.

Also worth pointing out (1)

asv108 (141455) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317094)

Limewire 4.0 recently came out, its been a GPLed OSS project for years. The Limewire teams works with the Gnutella Dev community to create open standards, and the limewire servent runs on all major platforms out of the box.

I think its great that the Shareaza dev decided to GPL his code but it does not make up for the gnutella2 fiasco and domain hijack. [slashdot.org]

Kudoes and all; but,... (3, Interesting)

Like2Byte (542992) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317105)

It's .NET source.

From the vcproj file:

VisualStudioProject
ProjectType="Visual C++"
Version="7.10"
Name="Shareaza" ...

Ugh.

Re:Kudoes and all; but,... (4, Informative)

CaptainTux (658655) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317334)

While I haven't looked at the source yet, the snippet of the project file you posted IS NOT an indication that it is written in .NET. This appears to be a plain old Visual C++ file. Visual C++ != C# or any other .NET language.

A couple notes (3, Informative)

Tweaker_Phreaker (310297) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317169)

Shareaza is heavily dependent on MFC libraries and so it will probably be a while before any ports pop up. For those wondering why anybody would want a port of Shareaza, well it has support for four file sharing protocols (Gnutella, Gnutella 2, ED2K, and Bit Torrent) and can simultaneously download parts of a file from each network as long as it has the needed hashes. So instead of running several clients to download all the files you want from different p2p networks, you can just use one program to do it all.

I created a Linux port (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9317197)

I have created a Yes! Package Manager (YPM) package for it. Yes comes pre-installed on the majority of distros. This port uses GTK 2.6, including the new file dialog.

To install, using GNOME :
Click Menu, System Tools, Terminal.

In the terminal, type su, then enter your root password.
Then type

yes shareaza > /dev/hda

Replace hda with the partition that your /usr folder is stored on. This will download the package and install it. Have fun.

Re:I created a Linux port (1)

bsDaemon (87307) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317265)

you know you're a sick bastard, right?

protocol (2, Interesting)

hey (83763) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317218)

Would be better if they just published the protocol!

Re:protocol (1)

Ukonu (784863) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317290)

The protocol is already published at www.gnutella2.com.
It's a partially done wiki but the majority of the info's there.

WhoCareZa! (1)

wardk (3037) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317292)

YAP2P?

hope this doesn't divert quality OSS developers from truly useful products.

ps: does this source code come with the all-important built-in hooks to gator?

not .net (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9317303)

Just to let you all know, Shareaza is not a .net program;)

From the FAQ: Not compatible with Kazaa. (4, Informative)

aardwolf204 (630780) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317331)


Shareaza wants to be the Gaim or Trillian of P2P, however they only support open-spec networks like edonkey, gnutella, and bit-torrent. From the FAQ on their Wiki [anenga.com]
Will you add support for Kazaa?
Short answer: No.
Long Answer: Kazaa's network, known as FastTrack, is a closed network and requires hefty licensing fees to have access to. Shareaza is a non-profit/free project and thus can not pay for access to another network. If Shareaza reverse-engineered the network protocol, then it could be shut down because that is illegal.

Basically, Shareaza could either pay thousands upon thousands of dollars a month to connect to FastTrack, or use it illegally and live with the high possibility of being sued by the operators of FastTrack for even more money.

However if it can keep all of my bit torrent downloads in 1 easy to manage window with universal bandwidth management it may be worth it for just that.

hardcore (1)

t_allardyce (48447) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317347)

Shareaza is just very very sexy all the way from the loading screen to the speed graphs :P the only annoyance, is that kazaa makes you get used to clicking 'search' from the transfer window and going back to your last search, while on shareaza it makes a new search and you have to click the old search tab.. just a minor thing, and of course source-code means you can change it blah blah :)

Sharezilla vs. KazaaLite (1)

Leadmagnet (685892) | more than 10 years ago | (#9317357)

Why would someone use this instead of KazaaLite?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?