On Thu, 12 Feb 2015 10:57:07 GMT, Brooks <Brooks@Baltimore.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 09 Feb 2015 19:39:38 -0500, Bill Williams wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 09 Feb 2015 18:09:05 GMT, Brooks <Brooks@Baltimore.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 08 Feb 2015 12:32:33 -0500, Bill Williams wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 16 Jan 2015 09:43:52 GMT, homebox@web.de (oldhomer) wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The second RAR segment went "dud," as did two of the largest PAR
>>>> files. I don't mean that they came through partially, but rather that
>>>> they were so broken that nothing but an error message downloaded.
>>>>
>>>> Any chance of replenishment?
>>>
>>>Again, maybe you would be better off using the included Par files.
>>
>> That's really, REALLY helpful, considering that when a PAR file is
>> totally busted (i.e., nothing appears on an attempt to download the
>> damned thing) there's not enough PAR data available to reconstruct the
>> missing RAR segment. Or segments.
>>
>> [/sarc]
>>
>> Got any PRACTICABLE suggestions?
>
>Instead of bitchin' and moanin' here, why don't you discuss with your
>usenet provider, because the three .rar files here unpacked without
>issue. Didn't need the pars at all. Or, you are attempting to pull them
>down before the files have fully populated their servers.
>
>Again, no issue here.
Yep. No practicable solutions. Just blame the Usenet provider
and/or allege that these particular files somehow (how?) weren't
yet "ripe" for download.
|
|