David wrote:
In replies to the post requesting support of the “file://” scheme, requests
were made for someone to provide a compelling reason to want to do this.
Perhaps the following is such a reason.
hi david,
thank you for your interesting example. support for “file://” scheme
will be
In replies to the post requesting support of the file:// scheme, requests were made for someone to provide a compelling reason to want to do this. Perhaps the following is such a reason.I have a CD with HTML content (it is a CD of abstracts from a scientific conference), however for space
Hi All,
first of all, keep in mind that rsync already handle local (and remote)
file/dir transfer at best, IMHO rsync is the best solution, ever, for
coping files when you have shell access to.
You can have a look at here: http://rsync.samba.org/ftp/rsync/rsync.html
just look at the details of
I, too, see little value in using Wget to copy files which are
accessible locally, but let's say that someone wished to add this
feature. Given a link like file:///a/b.c, what would be the
destination for the downloaded file on the local file system? How
would link conversion work?
Also,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This may be useful when some network share are mounted to local file system
*** OK, so why do you want to download the file from local file system to
local
file system?
Because Wget can shows the download speed, restart a download with
`-c', etc. I second the
