|
|
Posted by anthonyberet on 10/09/05 11:32
Morton Davis wrote:
> <me@privacy.net> wrote in message news:3u7rm3FvuubeU1@individual.net...
>
>>anthonyberet wrote:
>>
>>>me@privacy.net wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>I've tried both the fixes to WinMX: the version 1.9 from WinMX
>>>>Central, and Vladd's PIEPatch2.6. The Vladd patch seems to work
>
> better.
>
>>>>However, I'm curious as to what each one does. What is the difference
>>>>between them?
>>>>
>>>
>>>As weel as the other answer people have given, there is are differences
>>>in the chace servers.
>>>The DLL has just one server, and if that is down you wont be able to
>>>connect (with one version, winmx would crash).
>>>However, the DLL cache server is slao connected to the network and it
>>>collects the IP addresses of primaries by sniffing the search traffic.
>>>The PIE patch is simply, but possible more robust, as it just redirects
>>>winmx to connect at a number of cache servers, which draw their lists of
>>>primaries from those attempting to connect.
>>>- I believe the scaped info is tha last few primaries to connect - this
>>>can lead to a long wait to connect if a bunch try to connect at the same
>>>time but faile - they then all spend time retrying each-other for ages.
>>
>>That may explain why the DLL patch didn't work as well as the PIE patch.
>>
>>Thanks, Anthony, and all!
>>
>>
>
> The 1.6 works great!
>
>
I am amazed at the number of typos I made in that post.
Would you believe I don't normally use a spellchecker? - I wonder what
was wrong with me at the time I posted.
(And no, I wasn't pissed or anything exciting like that ;)
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|