[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Bug-wget] Problem using GNU Wget 1.11.4 Windows version

From: Paul Wratt
Subject: Re: [Bug-wget] Problem using GNU Wget 1.11.4 Windows version
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2012 22:06:34 +1300

I have seen strange results on ftp (usually) with files around key
values (128/256/512 bytes) and possibly continuing that pattern.


On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 11:22 AM, Henrik Holst
<address@hidden> wrote:
> Well I think that we can rule out the server because it seams to do this
> the correct way.
> I created an "empty" file just the size of which a signed 32-bit integer
> would have troubles with:
> address@hidden:~$ truncate --size 2147483648 Fedora-16-i386-DVD.iso
> I then turned on capture in Wireshark and told wget to do a resume:
> address@hidden:~$ wget -c "
> http://mirrors.kernel.org/fedora/releases/16/Fedora/i386/iso/Fedora-16-i386-DVD.iso
> "
> Now looking at the HTTP request in Wireshark I can see that my version of
> Wget sends the correct range in order to resume the download:
> GET /fedora/releases/16/Fedora/i386/iso/Fedora-16-i386-DVD.iso HTTP/1.0
> *Range: bytes=2147483648- *
> User-Agent: Wget/1.12 (linux-gnu)
> Accept: */*
> Host: mirrors.kernel.org
> Connection: Keep-Alive
> And I can also see that the server does respond in a correct manner:
> HTTP/1.1 206 Partial Content
> Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 22:14:09 GMT
> Server: Apache/2.2.22 (Fedora)
> Last-Modified: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 03:18:38 GMT
> ETag: "276805c0-e2e0b000-4b0cc0b679f80"
> Accept-Ranges: bytes
> *Content-Length: 1658892288
> Content-Range: bytes 2147483648-3806375935/3806375936 *
> Keep-Alive: timeout=5, max=1000
> Connection: Keep-Alive
> Content-Type: application/x-iso9660-image
> That of course only takes us half-way the problem since we also must ensure
> that wget fseeks to the correct position and that the server sends from the
> correct position (another fseek) but that I will not try tonight since the
> complete download of that file will take 6h for me and I have no time for
> that at the moment :(
> Of course seeing a capture of the above using the 32-bit windows version
> that JD uses would be quite interesting.
> /HH
> 2012/3/19 Micah Cowan <address@hidden>
>> On 03/19/2012 01:13 PM, JD wrote:
>> > I am sorry -
>> > Range requests??
>> > How can I see that when I run wget -c  ????
>> > You're asking for info I am at a loss as to how to obtain.
>> Sorry, I was slipping into potential technical explanations. You don't
>> need to know what ranged requests are.
>> As long as you follow the steps I outlined earlier (checking the point
>> where the corruption happens, and runnin wget with the --debug flag on
>> (so it gets as much information about what's going on as possible), we
>> should be able to help you figure out what's going on.
>> But again, first try a couple different builds of wget if you can, so we
>> can eliminate the possibility that you just got your hands on a bad build.
>> -mjc

reply via email to

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