Witam!
FUCK YOU!
Z Pozdrowieniami
lek med JANUSZ KWIECIE
ul.Polna 6
46-312 BODZANOWICE
ICQ 219989093
GG 1573275
AQQ 12284
0 pref 34 3596694 najpewniej po 22:00
W sprawach handlowych TYLKO poprzez e-mail
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message -
From: Arkadiusz Miskiewicz [EMAIL
I'm having trouble with downloading a file across https using wget. I can't
figure out if it is something i'm doing wrong with wget syntax, or if the
httpd server isn't working like it should.
# wget -d https://filed1/InBox/FILE3 --http-user=blahuser
--http-passwd=blahpw
DEBUG output created
Simons, Rick [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm having trouble with downloading a file across https using wget.
I can't figure out if it is something i'm doing wrong with wget
syntax, or if the httpd server isn't working like it should.
I don't know what's goingn wrong here. Your Wget syntax
Using 1.9 I get a different error ...
using 1.8.2=
# wget https://filed1/InBox/FILE3 --http-user=user --http-passwd=pass
--08:59:11-- https://filed1/InBox/FILE3
= `FILE3'
Resolving filed1... done.
Connecting to filed1[10.144.52.235]:443... connected.
HTTP request sent, awaiting
Simons, Rick [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Using 1.9 I get a different error ...
[...]
using 1.9b5
# ./wget https://filed1/InBox/FILE3 --http-user=user --http-passwd=pass
https://filed1/InBox/FILE3: Unsupported scheme.
That just means that you haven't compiled 1.9-b5 with SSL. Did you
compile
I believe 1.8 was an rpm install, but I could be mistaken. You are right
about the 1.9 install .. it was just a config/make/make install on the tar I
nabbed. How can I determine if I have SSL includes on a RH9 box? Could
that be causing the server response -- file issue i'm experiencing?
This beta includes portability tweaks and minor improvements. Please
test it on as many diverse platforms as possible, preferrably with
both gcc and non-gcc compilers. If all goes well, I'd like to release
1.9 perhaps as early as tomorrow.
Windows, msvc:
host.c
host.c(604) : error C2065:
Simons, Rick [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I believe 1.8 was an rpm install, but I could be mistaken. You are
right about the 1.9 install .. it was just a config/make/make
install on the tar I nabbed. How can I determine if I have SSL
includes on a RH9 box?
I think you need to install the
Herold Heiko [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This beta includes portability tweaks and minor improvements. Please
test it on as many diverse platforms as possible, preferrably with
both gcc and non-gcc compilers. If all goes well, I'd like to release
1.9 perhaps as early as tomorrow.
Windows,
Herold Heiko [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
From: Hrvoje Niksic [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Does it compile if you change #define HAVE_U_INT32_T 1 to #undef
HAVE_U_INT32_T in config.h.ms?
It does.
Windows msvc binary at http://xoomer.virgilio.it/hherold
Cool. BTW does MSVC have int32_t?
From: Hrvoje Niksic [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Does it compile if you change #define HAVE_U_INT32_T 1 to #undef
HAVE_U_INT32_T in config.h.ms?
It does.
Windows msvc binary at http://xoomer.virgilio.it/hherold
Heiko
--
-- PREVINET S.p.A. www.previnet.it
-- Heiko Herold [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
C:\Programmi\Microsoft Visual Studio\VC98\Include\Native.h has:
typedef long int32_t;
However the comment for Native.h says:
// Public header for facilities provided by MSJava.dll
so I don't know if that one should be used. As a matter of fact the only
other header including Native.h is
Herold Heiko [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
C:\Programmi\Microsoft Visual Studio\VC98\Include\Native.h has:
typedef long int32_t;
I see. We're currently not using signed 32-bit variables, so I guess
the point is moot.
Thanks Hrvoje, using
http://.../InventoryStatus.asp?cboSupplier=4541-134289status=allaction-select=Query
in IE worked like a charm. I didn't have to follow links. I am now trying to automate
this using wget 1.8.2 (Windows).
There are two steps involved:
1). Log in to the customer's web site. I
Suhas Tembe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
There are two steps involved:
1). Log in to the customer's web site. I was able to create the following link after
I looked at the form section in the source as explained to me earlier by Hrvoje.
wget
I tried, but it doesn't seem to have worked. This what I did:
wget --save-cookies=cookies.txt
http://customer.website.com?UserAccount=USERAccessCode=PASSWORDLocale=English
(United States)TimeZone=(GMT-5:00) Eastern Standard Time (USA amp;
Canada)action-Submit=Login
wget
A slight correction the first wget should read:
wget --save-cookies=cookies.txt
http://customer.website.com/supplyweb/general/default.asp?UserAccount=USERAccessCode=PASSWORDLocale=en-usTimeZone=EST:-300action-Submit=Login
I tried this link in IE, but it it comes back to the same login
Hi Suhas!
Well, I am by no means an expert, but I think that wget
closes the connection after the first retrieval.
The SSL server realizes this and decides that wget has no right to log in
for the second retrieval, eventhough the cookie is there.
I think that is a correct behaviour for a
Suhas Tembe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I tried, but it doesn't seem to have worked. This what I did:
wget --save-cookies=cookies.txt
http://customer.website.com?UserAccount=USERAccessCode=PASSWORDLocale=English
(United States)TimeZone=(GMT-5:00) Eastern Standard Time (USA amp;
Jens Rösner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well, I am by no means an expert, but I think that wget closes the
connection after the first retrieval. The SSL server realizes this
and decides that wget has no right to log in for the second
retrieval, eventhough the cookie is there. I think that is a
So, is there a way I can get to the page I want after logging into a secure server
using wget? Can I keep the SSL connection open for the second retrieval to work?
The other thing I noticed is that the first URL (to log in) does not seem to work,
because when I use that same URL in IE, it
Cookies.txt looks like this:
# HTTP cookie file.
# Generated by Wget on 2003-10-13 13:19:26.
# Edit at your own risk.
There is nothing after the 3rd line. So, it doesn't look like a valid cookie file.
- Original Message -
From: Hrvoje Niksic [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Suhas Tembe [EMAIL
It seems touch() is called on an open file and hence
utime() is either silently ignored or causing Access denied on
Watcom.
I added this inside touch():
DEBUGP ((touching %s to %.24s\n, file, asctime(localtime(tm;
And ran:
wget -d -Otcpdump.tgz
Suhas Tembe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Cookies.txt looks like this:
# HTTP cookie file.
# Generated by Wget on 2003-10-13 13:19:26.
# Edit at your own risk.
There is nothing after the 3rd line. So, it doesn't look like a
valid cookie file.
It's valid all right, but there are no cookies
It seems touch() is called on an open file and hence
utime() is either silently ignored or causing Access denied on
Watcom.
Correction; Watcom says Permission denied.
--gv
Suhas Tembe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The other thing I noticed is that the first URL (to log in) does not
seem to work, because when I use that same URL in IE, it brings me
back to the login screen (see attached source of the login
page). I don't get logged-in.
Why are you using that URL if
Hi Hrvoje!
retrieval, eventhough the cookie is there. I think that is a
correct behaviour for a secure server, isn't it?
Why would it be correct?
Sorry, I seem to have been misled by my own (limited) experience:
From the few secure sites I use, most will not let you
log in again after
Jens Rösner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi Hrvoje!
retrieval, eventhough the cookie is there. I think that is a
correct behaviour for a secure server, isn't it?
Why would it be correct?
Sorry, I seem to have been misled by my own (limited) experience:
From the few secure sites I use,
Gisle Vanem [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It seems touch() is called on an open file and hence utime() is
either silently ignored or causing Access denied on Watcom.
[...]
wget -d -Otcpdump.tgz http://www.tcpdump.org/daily/tcpdump-2003.09.29.tar.gz
[touch] Should IMHO be called after the file is
Hrvoje Niksic [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Wget already has code that closes and reopens output document if
it's a regular file. Perhaps the same should be done here...
Allthough IE or other browsers doesn't seems to do it, I think it would
be a good thing to honour the Last-Modified header on
30 matches
Mail list logo
