Re: [Bug-wget] How to disable reading or settings in .wgetrc?

[Avinash Sonawane]

On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 8:00 AM, L A Walsh <address@hidden> wrote:

> Tried that, but I used the 'no' prefix, as in --noconvert-links.

Then you didn't exactly try that!

> "no-" isn't really an english prefix.

Well, wget isn't really an English word either ;)

> What would happen if wget allowed specifying 'no' in addition to its current 
> behavior?

Think about a hypothetical future option "nocturnal". Now is that a
"no cturnal"? Or is it an option which can be negated as
"nonocturnal"?

Of course, any technical challenge can be handled by forming an
appropriate logic. But bringing in an additional complexity to the
code just to save one key press ("no-" vs "no") isn't really worth it
IMHO. :)

> BTW, --noconfig doesn't work, (--config is affirming you want a
> specific config file, no)?
[...]
>         Why not --noconfig?

Because again, $ man wget says:
"Most options that do not accept arguments are boolean options, so
named because their state can be captured with a yes-or-no ("boolean")
variable.
...
--config=FILE
           Specify the location of a startup file you wish to use."

Clearly, --config is not a boolean option. So can't be "negated".

> I tried it with --config="" and it didn't like that
> (file not found).
> Seems like that should have cleared the config file as well,
> since "" is hardly a valid filename.

This seems like a good idea actually! And if we implement this for --config
then I'd love to see this implemented for other relevant options as
well!

> I would have thought /dev/zero to
> be about as likely.

No, you shouldn't use /dev/zero as the file is infinite in length and
wget will never finish reading it which will lead to all memory being
eaten up!

> I may have looked
> at the section on switches, and not all the other, "unrelated" text....(if
> it was related to one of the switches, wouldn't it be
> mentioned w/that switch?)... (*sigh*)

That "unrelated" text is related to multiple switches so it has kept
under the heading "Option Syntax" right before where all the options
are explained. I'm sorry but I can't think of more logical place to
present that "unrelated" text ;)

-- 
Avinash Sonawane (rootKea)
PICT, Pune
https://rootkea.wordpress.com