"could not download" error message
 

Hi, I'm new to this and hope you can help.

I recently loaded 2.9.6 and am running on OS X 10.1.5.

Problem is that everytime I try to download anything, I get this error message in the status bar "could not download"

I was having better luck before I paid for PRO

Help please!

If you hold the mouse arrow over the message, you should see a message "awaiting more sources." Just restart the search for that file again (command-click on the appropriate search tab, or enter the criteria again) to find new sources, and if the search turns up more good sources, LW will run through them in the background and the message will change.

If none can be found because hosts go offline or are too busy, or any of the many reasons files won't complete, kill the old download and start again.

If this is happening everytime with anything, upgrade to 10.2.4, try Acquisition or other p2p clients, and you'll find not much has changed. Paying for Pro was a mistake. Donating via Pro is the way to go to help develop a decent gnutella client for OSX.

I've learned to be content with ~10% download success; <1% upload on my mac. It's interesting to see how much changes on different days of the week and times of the day.

Cheers, and welcome.

"Could Not Download; Awaiting Sources"
 

"Could Not Download; Awaiting Sources"

It's not you - It's LimeWire 2.9.8. I've never had an appreciable problem with LimeWire until I installed this version. But now I'm having the same experience on a PC that you're having on a MAC.

Previous versions worked well (~10%) success, but version 2.9.8 blows! I can't get one single download to complete out of more than 100 search hits - That sucks. LimeWire went from arguably the best to possibly the worst.

"Could Not Download; Awaiting Sources"
/kpt

"could not download" simply replaced "requery sent".

Failed downloads will be restarted automatically if you search for the file you are trying to download manually and if this search returns a matching result.

Thanks, but...
 

First, there IS something wrong. You may not want to believe it, but there is. Previous several versions - No problem. This version - Problem.

Second, now that you mention it (I actually didn't), it is disappointing that failed downloads don't restart (without doing a manual search). I wax nostalgic for the days I could leave a list of failed files overnight and wa-lah - In the morning I would have several of the files waiting for me.

/kpt

Well this version works better than most for me after tweaking a few things. I believe you are unhappy, but you don't have to convince anyone here that it doesn't work for you. It sounds so bad I'm tempted to ask if you have your modem turned on!

If you could be more specific about the problems, someone should know a workaround or fix. I've been able to leave a list of downloads running all night and seen some complete in the morning (fair sized .mpg's).

trap_jaw's already given the first answer (best worded, too) to the most obvious problem: what's the next?

Re: Thanks, but...
 

I somewhat agree with you and I would greet a decision by LimeWire to become a little more agressive about downloading myself. There are a few simple changes that would allow us to reduce the number of failed downloads significantly. Unfortunately (from the user's point of view) LimeWire has always been very careful about retrying hosts, when one download attempt has failed. (There are certain risks of unintended DDoS attacks by LimeWire hosts.)

LimeWire's downloading code needs some refactoring, in my opinion, maybe some of those improvements will be made once LimeWire 3.0 with further improvements to the network is out.

Thanks!
 

Thank you, trap_jaw, for making the effort to see my 2nd point (my RFE). I honestly appreciate it.

Empowered, I offer the following additional observation relating to my 1st point (my perceived problem). Once connected, the host count continues to rise while searches are being performed and downloads are attempted. And, with previous versions, the longer I left it - The higher the host count (I mean this as a rule of thumb only - there are times, such as Sunday mid-morning, when the number falls off - Or conversely, such as Saturday early-evening when the number goes way up). However, The host count with the new version drops off dramatically when left unattended. Hmm.. Now that I've put this observation on paper (screen), it occurs to me that it is more likely attributed to the "fear of DOS attack" issue than my perceived problem.

I'll be back..
/kpt

The host count is very likely to go down a little because LimeWire ultrapeers devote less bandwidth to forwarding pong messages (and those messages are used to compute the host count). This has nothing to do with your actual search horizon and if you ask me, the number does more damage than it does good.

Thanks again.
 

Thanks for that explanation - Makes perfect sense now.

After looking at the hosts themselves, I found that almost all of the search hits I'm seeing are coming from two hosts. That's weird, but glossing over that, an obvious answer to my perceived problem is that perhaps both of those hosts are inaccessible (from my NATed address) and that would account for the ridiculous failure rate.

I'm going to get a life now. I'll let you know if I trip over any further info.

Thanks again.
/kpt