Just a note to let you know that wget 1.10alpha1 compiles and functions
under DOS (DJGPP). I revised the DOS patch to work with 1.10alpha1, and
sent it to the wget-patches list. I'll make a new binary available on
my web site, once we have a stable release.
Doug
--
Hello,
after reading so much about regex support for wget (espacially the lack
of it) and experiencing myself how annoying it can be if you have
downloaded a hundred /thumbs/ directories, I tried to implement regex
support myself.
I used pcre library from http://www.pcre.org which was pretty easy
On Wed, 6 Apr 2005, andi kete wrote:
> My question, using DOS wget, is:
>
> If wget is stopped before finished, links are not converted to relative
> links (which point to hard disk file:/);
> ...
> I would like to know whether you provide any utility program for that
>
> (in my situation, usi
"Jens Rösner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> AFAIK, RegExp for (HTML?) file rejection was requested a few times,
> but is not implemented at the moment.
But the shell-style globbing (which includes [Nn]ame) should still
work, even without regexps.
Jens Rösner wrote:
> AFAIK, RegExp for (HTML?) file rejection was requested a few times, but is
> not implemented at the moment.
It seems all the examples people are sending are just attempting to get a
match that is not case sensitive. A switch to ignore case in the file name
match would be a l
My question, using DOS wget, is:
If wget is stopped before finished, links are not converted to relative
links (which point to hard disk file:/);
as I couldn't find anything about that relating to wget on the web
(including not on your mailing list) and any wget option(s) I tried failed
to achi
Hi Jerry!
AFAIK, RegExp for (HTML?) file rejection was requested a few times, but is
not implemented at the moment.
CU
Jens (just another user)
> The "-R" option is not working in wget 1.9.1 for anything but
> specifically-hardcoded filenames..
>
> file[Nn]ames such as [Tt]hese are simply igno
Hello Georg,
On Friday, April 1, 2005 at 12:01:15 PM +0200, Georg Bauhaus wrote:
> The apostrophy might have been typed as an accent (acute) really
Most probably the RIGHT SINGLE QUOTATION MARK U+2019, <’>, encoded
in UTF-8, then wrongly seen as being CP-1252. It would look like "’"
(a ci