On Friday 07 December 2007 12:35:32 Jerrold Massey wrote:
JOB IN OUR COMPANY Dating Team company:
So which switch option makes wget a hot date then ?
--babe ?
On Friday 30 November 2007 03:38:54 Micah Cowan wrote:
David Ginger wrote:
On Friday 30 November 2007 01:03:06 Micah Cowan wrote:
David Ginger wrote:
What I'm looking at wget for is saving streamed mp3 from a radio
station, crazy but true.. such is life.
Isn't that already possible
On Friday 30 November 2007 13:45:08 Mauro Tortonesi wrote:
On Friday 30 November 2007 11:59:45 Hrvoje Niksic wrote:
Mauro Tortonesi [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I vote we stick with C. Java is slower and more prone to environmental
problems.
not really. because of its JIT compiler,
i totally agree with hrvoje here. also note that changing wget
unique-name-finding algorithm can potentially break lots of wget-based
scripts out there. i think we should leave these kind of changes for wget2
- or wget-on-steroids or however you want to call it ;-)
So can I ask is a wget2
On Friday 30 November 2007 00:02:25 Micah Cowan wrote:
Alan Thomas wrote:
What is wget2? Any plans to move to Java? (Of course, the latter
will not be controversial. :)
Java is not likely. The most likely language is probably still C,
especially as that's where our scant human
On Friday 30 November 2007 01:03:06 Micah Cowan wrote:
David Ginger wrote:
What I'm looking at wget for is saving streamed mp3 from a radio station,
crazy but true.. such is life.
Isn't that already possible now? Provided that the transport is HTTP,
that is?
Yes and No . . .
Yes I can
