Big files

2008-09-16 Thread Cristián Serpell

Hi

I would like to know if there is a reason for using a signed int for  
the length of the files to download. The thing is that I was trying to  
download a 2.3 GB file using wget, but then the length was printed as  
a negative number and wget said Aborted. Is it a bug or a design  
decision? Is there an option for downloading big files? In this case,  
I used curl.


Please CC replies, I'm not a suscriber

Thanks!
C S


Re: Big files

2008-09-16 Thread Doruk Fisek
Tue, 16 Sep 2008 11:19:50 -0400, Cristián Serpell
[EMAIL PROTECTED] :

 I would like to know if there is a reason for using a signed int for  
 the length of the files to download. The thing is that I was trying
 to download a 2.3 GB file using wget, but then the length was printed
 as a negative number and wget said Aborted. Is it a bug or a
 design decision?
Which version of wget are you using? It was a bug of older wget
versions. You can see it with the output of wget --version command
(latest version is 1.11.4).

I'm not having any trouble with downloading files bigger than 2G.

   Doruk

--
FISEK INSTITUTE - http://www.fisek.org.tr


RE: Big files

2008-09-16 Thread Tony Lewis
Cristián Serpell wrote:

 I would like to know if there is a reason for using a signed int for  
 the length of the files to download.

I would like to know why people still complain about bugs that were fixed
three years ago. (More accurately, it was a design flaw that originated from
a time when no computer OS supported files that big, but regardless of what
you call it, the change to wget was made to version 1.10 in 2005.)

Tony




Re: Big files

2008-09-16 Thread Cristián Serpell
It is the latest Ubuntu's distribution, that still comes with the old  
version.


Thanks anyway, that was the problem.

El 16-09-2008, a las 15:08, Tony Lewis escribió:


Cristián Serpell wrote:


I would like to know if there is a reason for using a signed int for
the length of the files to download.


I would like to know why people still complain about bugs that were  
fixed
three years ago. (More accurately, it was a design flaw that  
originated from
a time when no computer OS supported files that big, but regardless  
of what

you call it, the change to wget was made to version 1.10 in 2005.)

Tony






Re: Big files

2008-09-16 Thread Micah Cowan
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Cristián Serpell wrote:
 It is the latest Ubuntu's distribution, that still comes with the old
 version.
 
 Thanks anyway, that was the problem.

I know that's untrue. Ubuntu comes with 1.10.2 at least, and has for
quite some time. If you're using that, then it's probably a different
bug than Doruk and Tony were thinking of (perhaps one of the cases of
content-length mishandling that were recently fixed in the 1.11.x series).

IIRC Intrepid Ibex (Ubuntu 8.10) will have 1.11.4.

- --
Micah J. Cowan
Programmer, musician, typesetting enthusiast, gamer.
GNU Maintainer: wget, screen, teseq
http://micah.cowan.name/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFI0AnI7M8hyUobTrERAqptAJoCj0VC46dBOhrr/A3HsHyicciKWQCffyFQ
bHhmuYHmf52Yz1M5lu7Yk5Y=
=Z+fN
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


Re: Big files

2008-09-16 Thread Cristián Serpell
Maybe I should have started by this (I had to change the name of the  
file shown):


[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/tmp# wget --version
GNU Wget 1.10.2

Copyright (C) 2005 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
GNU General Public License for more details.

Originally written by Hrvoje Niksic [EMAIL PROTECTED].

[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/tmp# wget --debug http://program-linux64.tar.bz2
DEBUG output created by Wget 1.10.2 on linux-gnu.

--15:37:42--  http://program-linux64.tar.bz2
   = `program.tar.bz2'
Resolving www.ai.sri.com... 130.107.65.215
Caching www.ai.sri.com = 130.107.65.215
Connecting to www.ai.sri.com|130.107.65.215|:80... connected.
Created socket 3.
Releasing 0x0064a100 (new refcount 1).

---request begin---
GET /program-linux64.tar.bz2 HTTP/1.0
User-Agent: Wget/1.10.2
Accept: */*
Host: www.ai.sri.com
Connection: Keep-Alive

---request end---
HTTP request sent, awaiting response...
---response begin---
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2008 19:37:46 GMT
Server: Apache
Last-Modified: Tue, 08 Apr 2008 20:17:51 GMT
ETag: 7f710a-8a8e1bf7-47fbd2ef
Accept-Ranges: bytes
Content-Length: -1970398217
Keep-Alive: timeout=5, max=100
Connection: Keep-Alive
Content-Type: application/x-tar

---response end---
200 OK
Registered socket 3 for persistent reuse.
Length: -1,970,398,217 [application/x-tar]

[ =]  
0 --.--K/s


Aborted

El 16-09-2008, a las 15:32, Micah Cowan escribió:


-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Cristián Serpell wrote:

It is the latest Ubuntu's distribution, that still comes with the old
version.

Thanks anyway, that was the problem.


I know that's untrue. Ubuntu comes with 1.10.2 at least, and has for
quite some time. If you're using that, then it's probably a different
bug than Doruk and Tony were thinking of (perhaps one of the cases of
content-length mishandling that were recently fixed in the 1.11.x  
series).


IIRC Intrepid Ibex (Ubuntu 8.10) will have 1.11.4.

- --
Micah J. Cowan
Programmer, musician, typesetting enthusiast, gamer.
GNU Maintainer: wget, screen, teseq
http://micah.cowan.name/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFI0AnI7M8hyUobTrERAqptAJoCj0VC46dBOhrr/A3HsHyicciKWQCffyFQ
bHhmuYHmf52Yz1M5lu7Yk5Y=
=Z+fN
-END PGP SIGNATURE-





RE: Big files

2008-09-16 Thread Tony Lewis
Cristián Serpell wrote:

 Maybe I should have started by this (I had to change the name of the  
 file shown):
[snip]
 ---response begin---
 HTTP/1.1 200 OK
 Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2008 19:37:46 GMT
 Server: Apache
 Last-Modified: Tue, 08 Apr 2008 20:17:51 GMT
 ETag: 7f710a-8a8e1bf7-47fbd2ef
 Accept-Ranges: bytes
 Content-Length: -1970398217

The problem is not with wget. It's with the Apache server, which told wget
that the file had a negative length.

Tony