Just had this idea pop up in my mind. Instead of relying on volunteers mirroring package repositories all around the world, why not utilise BitTorrent protocol to move at the very least some some load unto the users and thus increase download speeds as well as decrease latency?

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    461 year ago

    What are you talking about? All that torrent traffic that my ISP sees is definitely Linux ISOs.

    Just doing my part

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    21 year ago

    To add to everything else mentioned, many places (schools, workplaces) don’t allow any usage of BitTorrent, even legal. A guy at my uni got yelled at for torrenting a Linux iso. Not to mention depending on where you live your ISP might be interested in that activity unless you’re using a vpn.

  • ಠ_ಠ
    link
    fedilink
    71 year ago

    Some distros do this already.

    Alternative downloads

    There are several other ways to get Ubuntu including torrents, which can potentially mean a quicker download, our network installer for older systems and special configurations and links to our regional mirrors for our older (and newer) releases.

    BitTorrent is a peer-to-peer download network that sometimes enables higher download speeds and more reliable downloads of large files. You need a BitTorrent client on your computer to enable this download method.

    https://ubuntu.com/download/alternative-downloads

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      41 year ago

      That’s not packages, that’s images. People download images relatively infrequently, but with rolling release distros, people download hundreds of packages on a regular basis

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    201 year ago

    Because HTTP is simpler, faster, easier, more reliable.

    The motivation for a a lot of p2p is to make it harder to shut down, but there is no danger of that for Linux distros. The other would be to save money, but Debian/Arch/etc. get more than enough bandwidth/server donations, so they’re not paying for that anyway.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    121 year ago

    Metallica ruined it. They made it seem as though torrenting was evil because their content was being downloaded. Poor babies.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      101 year ago

      Lars ruined Napster. BitTorrent came around some time later after Limewire, Soulseek, and DirectConnect. Lars might have had something to say about Bit Torrent, but by that point no one was listening.

      Besides, back then, we really were using BitTorrent mostly for Linux ISOs. At the time it was more reliable than http. It really sucked having to download an entire ISO again because it failed the checksum. BitTorrent alleviated that.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      111 year ago

      For the longest time people wondered: how do bees fly and don’t bump into each other? There are so many of them!

      To find out, people used high speed cameras, and then they were shocked by the fact that bees actually do bump into each other.

      Isn’t it ridiculous that we just take our assumptions on something we have no idea about as facts?

      • @[email protected]OP
        link
        fedilink
        1
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Yeah, not my brightest one, that’s for sure. Still, idk about what manu distros everyone is talking about. Big distros utilise volunteer-run mirrors, from what I’ve been able to find.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    411 year ago

    I suspect if this was enabled by default there would be uproar from people annoyed the distro was stealing their bandwidth, and if it were opt-in then very few people would do it.

    Windows Update uses peer to peer to distribute updates. It’s one of the first things I always disabled.

  • 𝘋𝘪𝘳𝘬
    link
    fedilink
    28
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Most common/relevant/larger distros do that at least for the install/live ISO.

    • lemmyvore
      link
      fedilink
      English
      291 year ago

      OP is taking about packages and updates using peer to peer, not just the install media. AFAIK no distro does that.

  • boredsquirrel
    link
    fedilink
    31 year ago

    Reminds me of the Talk about distributing firmware.

    Bittorrent is poorly pretty suspicious which may be used as an argument. But I dont see the reason really.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    131 year ago

    That’s actually a really interesting idea. Windows even does something, or at a point did something, similar with system updates.

    Peer to peer packages would have some privacy, and potential security issues of course but I like the thought

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      31 year ago

      Good lord, and windows doesn’t have a way to verify their ISOs are authentic. Do they sign this p2p payload in any way? Seems like a great opportunity to spread a worm

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    24
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    One reason is privacy and hence security. If you share a package, you also share the information that your system contains the oudtated package “xy” which has a backdoor and can be accessed by a hacker.

    I’m not sure if that is a valid argument with atomic image distros since you share the whole image. And the tracker could just disable the old image as soon as the new image arrives.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        41 year ago

        But as a third party you can not know which clients are using this outdated http mirror. On BitTorrent you can see every participating peers and some of them are probably enduser machines (depending on the actual implementation of OP’s suggestion).