starred/qBittorrent

Fork 0

mirror of https://github.com/qbittorrent/qBittorrent.git synced 2026-03-02 22:57:32 -05:00

Erroneous torrent (missing files) should pause to prevent re-downloading if Recheck finds no files? #13768

New issue

Open

opened 2026-02-22 00:18:43 -05:00 by deekerman · 4 comments

deekerman commented

2026-02-22 00:18:43 -05:00

Owner

Originally created by @slrslr on GitHub (Aug 28, 2022).

Suggestion

When (payload) files are missing for torrent during qbt startup, torrent is placed into category of erroneous torrents.
User clicks this category, right click to recheck the torrent. This torrent disappear from this category (that is inconvenient a bit, because i have to switch to All torrents and filter out, maybe forgetting the torrent name) in order to check what happened with the torrent. I have to do this quickly.

Why I have to? If (payload) files was relocated, i believe that torrent start downloading them again (if was not paused by user before got erroneous maybe), which is wrong, because i already have files most probably, only somewhere else. Maybe torrent has no longer seeder, only leechers with partial files. Then when i set proper location, qbt will overwrite complete files by incomplete #127. Thanks, but that is not good.

So i think that maybe when torrent is in erroneous torrents folder, and recheck is done it should stay in this folder and no payload files are found, then torrent should automatically turn to paused state and stay in that folder for ever or until next qbt start. Maybe if recheck resulted in 100% downloaded, torrent does not need to be paused but automatically resume its previous seeding state.

Thank You

Use case

No response

Extra info/examples/attachments

No response

Originally created by @slrslr on GitHub (Aug 28, 2022). ### Suggestion When (payload) files are missing for torrent during qbt startup, torrent is placed into category of erroneous torrents. User clicks this category, right click to recheck the torrent. This torrent disappear from this category (that is inconvenient a bit, because i have to switch to All torrents and filter out, maybe forgetting the torrent name) in order to check what happened with the torrent. I have to do this quickly. Why I have to? If (payload) files was relocated, i believe that torrent start downloading them again (if was not paused by user before got erroneous maybe), which is wrong, because i already have files most probably, only somewhere else. Maybe torrent has no longer seeder, only leechers with partial files. Then when i set proper location, qbt will overwrite complete files by incomplete #127. Thanks, but that is not good. So i think that maybe when torrent is in erroneous torrents folder, and recheck is done it should stay in this folder and no payload files are found, then torrent should automatically turn to paused state and stay in that folder for ever or until next qbt start. Maybe if recheck resulted in 100% downloaded, torrent does not need to be paused but automatically resume its previous seeding state. Thank You ### Use case _No response_ ### Extra info/examples/attachments _No response_

deekerman added the

Feature request

label

2026-02-22 00:18:43 -05:00

deekerman commented

2026-02-22 00:18:50 -05:00

Author

Owner

@glassez commented on GitHub (Aug 28, 2022):

Recheck actually means reset all and start from the scratch. If you don't want any torrent (including "missing files") to lose all the current progress, you should never do a recheck.

@glassez commented on GitHub (Aug 28, 2022): `Recheck` actually means `reset all and start from the scratch`. If you don't want any torrent (including "missing files") to lose all the current progress, you should never do a recheck.

deekerman commented

2026-02-22 00:18:52 -05:00

Author

Owner

@slrslr commented on GitHub (Aug 28, 2022):

@glassez Thanks.

When there is only one "check" kind of option known to allow user to check the files, so i think users use it to attempt to verify the existence of the files/payload at current location. And if check fails, it should NOT start downloading already downloaded files right away without asking, because user may want to change location, rename payload. As described, auto-download after recheck (at background without user knowing possibly, as described) of the data (that was likely already downloaded), without confirmation to user, may be wasting bandwidth and also as per the issue linked in 1st post it is making mess/possible data loss.

Solution/Feature request:

Before starting multiple torrents recheck or after first payload is not found (after recheck), prompt: What to do in case files(payload) is not found? Download again (may cause duplicity) / Set as Paused / Leave it in Missing Files category / Cancel operation?
Single torrent recheck: Upon finding 0% payload ask: Files/payload not found for torrent ABC. A) Download again B) Change save path C) Return it back to Missing files category, i will manage it manually.
Return missing payload torrents back to erroneous category (Missing files?) after recheck.
Implement database/index of file hashes - actually Missing files category may rarely be utilized and recheck needed if feature #6520 is in place

@slrslr commented on GitHub (Aug 28, 2022): @glassez Thanks. When there is only one "check" kind of option known to allow user to check the files, so i think users use it to attempt to verify the existence of the files/payload at current location. And if check fails, it should NOT start downloading already downloaded files right away without asking, because user may want to change location, rename payload. As described, auto-download after recheck (at background without user knowing possibly, as described) of the data (that was likely already downloaded), without confirmation to user, may be wasting bandwidth and also as per the issue linked in 1st post it is making mess/possible data loss. Solution/Feature request: - Before starting multiple torrents recheck or after first payload is not found (after recheck), prompt: What to do in case files(payload) is not found? Download again (may cause duplicity) / Set as Paused / Leave it in Missing Files category / Cancel operation? - Single torrent recheck: Upon finding 0% payload ask: Files/payload not found for torrent ABC. A) Download again B) Change save path C) Return it back to Missing files category, i will manage it manually. - Return missing payload torrents back to erroneous category (Missing files?) after recheck. - Implement database/index of file hashes - actually Missing files category may rarely be utilized and recheck needed if feature #6520 is in place

deekerman commented

2026-02-22 00:18:52 -05:00

Author

Owner

@thisisnotmyrealname commented on GitHub (Sep 10, 2022):

A sane approach would be to go to a paused state after completing a forced recheck, regardless of file completion so user has a chance to review status.

User can then start/delete torrents based on the results of it being rechecked.

@thisisnotmyrealname commented on GitHub (Sep 10, 2022): A sane approach would be to go to a paused state after completing a forced recheck, regardless of file completion so user has a chance to review status. User can then start/delete torrents based on the results of it being rechecked.

deekerman commented

2026-02-22 00:18:52 -05:00

Author

Owner

@xavier2k6 commented on GitHub (May 24, 2025):

ANNOUNCEMENT!

For anybody coming across this "Feature Request" & would like/love to see a potential implementation in the future!
Here are some options available to you:

Please select/click the 👍 &/or ❤ reactions in the original/opening post of this ticket.
Please feel free (If you have the "skillset") to create a "Pull Request" implementing what's being requested in this ticket.
(new/existing contributors/developers are always welcome)

DO:

Provide constructive feedback.
Display how other projects implemented same/similar etc.

DO NOT:

Add a "Bump", "me too", "2nd/3rd" etc. or "criticizing" comment(s).
(These will be disregarded/hidden as "spam/abuse/off-topic" etc. as they don't provide anything constructive.)

@xavier2k6 commented on GitHub (May 24, 2025): ## ANNOUNCEMENT! For anybody coming across this **_"Feature Request"_** & would like/love to see a potential implementation in the future! **Here are some options available to you:** 1. Please select/click the 👍 **&/or** ❤ `reactions` in the original/opening post of this ticket. 2. Please feel free _(If you have the "skillset")_ to create a **_"Pull Request"_** implementing what's being requested in this ticket. **_(new/existing contributors/developers are always welcome)_** ____ **DO:** * Provide constructive feedback. * Display how other projects implemented same/similar etc. **DO NOT:** * Add a "Bump", "me too", "2nd/3rd" etc. or "criticizing" comment(s). **(These will be disregarded/hidden as "spam/abuse/off-topic" etc. as they don't provide anything constructive.)**