duch

$40

Same here. Yes.

@RomanZ Thanks !

Ugliest workflow ever.

With the release of 2.0, will this be the last release in the 1.4 branch ?

https://web.archive.org/web/20130811154750/http://forum.bittorrent.com/topic/17782-bittorrent-sync-faq-unofficial/#entry44650

I completely remember this too.

No nagging so far appart from the autoupdate windows saying 2.0 is out.

Errr ... nope. Got 1.4.111 popping via auto update about four hours ago on two OSX computers.

Way, WAY too expensive + complete broken promise on limitations. I'll stay on 1.4.111 while I learn SyncThing, test it, and eventually transition everything to it if it's stable enough.

The Direct Link is for 1.4.110, not 1.4.111

No. Don't know where that came from.

+1 for this feature request

Even without accounting for the OS the limit will probably be way lower, on my Pi btsync needs 40 to 50 MB of memory to sync 29k files. Furthermore the 512 MB of memory of the Pi B or B+ can't be wholy used by system and/or user processes, a fraction of it has to be dedicated to the GPU (which is required in the boot process). The minimum is supposed to be 16 MB but I had trouble with values lower than 32 MB.

I agree, that would be really convenient.

What do you mean by dock icon ? An app icon in the actual dock or a small icon in the upper tray ? BT Sync on OS X can start automatically per user when said user open a session.

+1 for a .SyncInclude file or any equivalent whitelist mechanism.

It's been fixed and works fine (and you could easily have found the information).

Two successive one hour period iostat gave me 80% avg-cpu idle. 12% less than prior to update.

Using iostat, prior to BT Sync update, avg-cpu idle was stable around 68% after 24h. I updated four days ago and iostat now report 74% idle, and it is still (slowly) decreasing. I'll do a one hour period iostat and report. The btsync process itself is idling between 0.0 and 0.9 % of the Raspberry Pi CPU according to htop, from what I remember 1.3.109 was way higher, around 6-10%. I went straight from 1.3.109 to 1.4.93, so I can't compare with previous 1.4 releases. I'm wondering if the lower CPU usage I'm experiencing might be related to the xattrs fix (no matter what I did to prevent the linux box from trying to sync them, they still seemed to trigger some activity).

I too switched to 1.4.93 a few days ago as it fixed the port issue. Pretty much the same configuration as travellyan (2 mac desktops, 2 mac laptops, one -cheap- always on linux box, one iPad as a bonus). Around 35 GB of data synced, part backup, part cloud storage and part app preference syncing. I cleaned every .SyncIgnore of xattrs related stuff on every shared folder of all 5 computers before doing a clean install on the first laptop. It seemed to work fine, so I updated the others. Everything works, no more xattrs induced headaches, no beef with the interface (I don't get why so many people went completely berserk with it). RAM usage increased slightly on the Linux Box (Raspberry B running Archlinux arm) but idle CPU usage dropped considerably compared to 1.3.109.

Unconstructive criticism sux even harder.

The same here, I've got no issues with the UI, but the core functionality seems way too much full of bug and unreliable in 1.4.x, so I'm still on 1.3.109 everywhere. Regarding UI, I'd actually like the idea of having a real web UI accessible through a browser (like the linux version) on every platform.

Hi Dennis. No problem ignoring finder metadata, the file themselves will sync ok, you just won't sync things like the Tags applied to them.

The dot in front of a folder or file name in a Linux / OSx / etc system is used to make it hidden (it won't show up by default on your desktop environnement and using ls without the -a or -A argument on the command line won't display it either). .DS_Store are files automatically created by OS X to store custom attributes of a folder (icons positions and such). They start with a . so they're hidden on Unix based systems, but they'll show up if the disk is mounted on a Windows system.