"run on torrent finished" execute using the "path for incomplete torrents" configuration #15640

New issue

Open

opened 2026-02-22 02:20:41 -05:00 by deekerman · 2 comments

deekerman commented

2026-02-22 02:20:41 -05:00

Owner

Originally created by @t-900-a on GitHub (Apr 1, 2024).

Suggestion

There should be an option to have a program run after a torrent is finished and the program should run in the directory where the incomplete torrents are.

At this time the behavior upon a download completion is that qbittorrent moves the files to the finished directory, then runs the program.

Use case

multi-part rar files that should be processed in the temp directory. In my case the temp directory is an ssd drive, while the completion directory is an hdd

Extra info/examples/attachments

No response

Originally created by @t-900-a on GitHub (Apr 1, 2024). ### Suggestion There should be an option to have a program run after a torrent is finished and the program should run in the directory where the incomplete torrents are. At this time the behavior upon a download completion is that qbittorrent moves the files to the finished directory, then runs the program. ### Use case multi-part rar files that should be processed in the temp directory. In my case the temp directory is an ssd drive, while the completion directory is an hdd ### Extra info/examples/attachments _No response_

deekerman added the

Feature request

Triggers

labels

2026-02-22 02:20:41 -05:00

deekerman commented

2026-02-22 02:20:48 -05:00

Author

Owner

@gshpychka commented on GitHub (Mar 27, 2025):

Would also like this as a new option. Due to my slow target drive, I would enable alternative speed limit when the torrent downloads, and disable it after it's been moved.

@gshpychka commented on GitHub (Mar 27, 2025): Would also like this as a new option. Due to my slow target drive, I would enable alternative speed limit when the torrent downloads, and disable it after it's been moved.

deekerman commented

2026-02-22 02:20:50 -05:00

Author

Owner

@xavier2k6 commented on GitHub (May 25, 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 25, 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.)**