[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Bug-wget] wget with the -i option.

From: Ray Sterner
Subject: Re: [Bug-wget] wget with the -i option.
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 16:00:54 -0400 (EDT)

  Hello Micah,

  Thanks for the feedback on this.  I was almost banging my head against
  the wall trying to get this to work.

  Is the change you mention below something that might be made?
  Is the -i option used very often?  Seems like it should be really
  useful.  Anyway, I'll be looking forward to a version with the
  update when it comes.

  Thanks for your help.

  Ray Sterner                     address@hidden 
  The Johns Hopkins University    North latitude 39.16 degrees.
  Applied Physics Laboratory      West longitude 76.90 degrees.
  Laurel, MD 20723-6099

On Wed, 28 Apr 2010, Micah Cowan wrote:

> Ray Sterner wrote:
> >   Hello Micah,
> > 
> >   When I use wget to grab all the files from the ftp site they download
> >   very quickly (relatively).  That means it's possible to do.
> Yes. It's only a design flaw that prevents this from working on a
> list-of-URLs. The recursive-descent mode, by its very nature, almost has
> to reuse the same connection, but for some reason, the list-of-URLs mode
> doesn't.
> >   I can see why making a new connection for each file in a list is a
> >   reasonable default, they might be scattered all over the web.
> If they were, then it would make sense. But it can't be that hard to
> save the connection and check to see if we still have an open connection
> to the host, just as we do on HTTP. Though I suppose the main difference
> there is that HTTP doesn't have to keep track of what the current
> working directory is, the way FTP would need to.
> >   I guess the get-all-the-files mode must use a single connection for
> >   everything on the target site.
> Yup.
> >   Maybe a useful new option would be one that tries to use the same
> >   connection for as many files as it can in the given list.
> IMO, this doesn't need to be a new option. I don't believe anyone
> _wants_ the current behavior for URL-lists, and if for some reason they
> do, they could just run wget itself in a loop, giving it a single arg at
> a time.
> It just needs someone to make the change. :)
> -- 
> Micah J. Cowan
> http://micah.cowan.name/

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]