Re: [Bug-wget] Does -o work correctly now?

Tim Rühsen writes: > Looks like commit dd5c549f6af8e1143e1a6ef66725eea4bcd9ad50 broke it. > > Sadly, the test suite doesn't catch it. "Wajda, Piotr" writes: > Patch sent, should be good now. Does the patch include a test in the test suite to catch this

Re: [Bug-wget] [PATCH] Respect -o parameter

Tim Rühsen writes: > Thanks, Piotr ! Commit has been pushed. Great, thanks! Dale

Re: [Bug-wget] [PATCH] Respect -o parameter

On Mittwoch, 9. November 2016 10:57:01 CET Piotr Wajda wrote: > * log.c: don't choose log output dynamically when opt.lfilename is set > --- > src/log.c | 6 +++--- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/src/log.c b/src/log.c > index e068acf..51f30c4 100644 > ---

Re: [Bug-wget] Does -o work correctly now?

Patch sent, should be good now. Piotr On 08/11/16 22:29, Tim Rühsen wrote: On Dienstag, 8. November 2016 15:26:14 CET Dale R. Worley wrote: I've been getting a script working, and as part of it, it appears that -o does not work correctly. Specifically -o is supposed to send all "messages" to

[Bug-wget] [PATCH] Respect -o parameter

* log.c: don't choose log output dynamically when opt.lfilename is set --- src/log.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/log.c b/src/log.c index e068acf..51f30c4 100644 --- a/src/log.c +++ b/src/log.c @@ -956,11 +956,11 @@ static void

Re: [Bug-wget] Does -o work correctly now?

Yeah, I'll look into it. Piotr On 08/11/16 22:29, Tim Rühsen wrote: On Dienstag, 8. November 2016 15:26:14 CET Dale R. Worley wrote: I've been getting a script working, and as part of it, it appears that -o does not work correctly. Specifically -o is supposed to send all "messages" to a