Micah Cowan wrote:
Keeping a single Wget and using runtime libraries (which we were terming
plugins) was actually the original concept (there's mention of this in
the first post of this thread, actually); the issue is that there are
core bits of functionality (such as the multi-stream
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Tony Lewis wrote:
Micah Cowan wrote:
Keeping a single Wget and using runtime libraries (which we were
terming plugins) was actually the original concept (there's
mention of this in the first post of this thread, actually); the
issue is that
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Micah Cowan wrote:
Tony Lewis wrote:
Perhaps both versions can include multi-threaded support in their
core version, but the lite version would never invoke
multi-threading.
I mentioned this in the first post as well. The main problem I
Micah Cowan wrote:
I'm not sure what you mean about the linux thing; there are many
instances of runtime loadable modules on Linux. dlopen() and friends are
the standard way of doing this on any Unix kernel flavor.
I _thought_ so, but when I asked a distro why they didn't
use
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
L Walsh wrote:
Micah Cowan wrote:
I'm not sure what you mean about the linux thing; there are many
instances of runtime loadable modules on Linux. dlopen() and friends are
the standard way of doing this on any Unix kernel flavor.
I
On 10/31/07, Micah Cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Tony Godshall wrote:
On 10/30/07, Micah Cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Tony Godshall wrote:
Perhaps the little wget could be called wg.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
L Walsh wrote:
Honest -- I hadn't read all the threads before my post...
Great ideas Micah! :-)
On the idea of 2 wgets -- there is a clever way to get
by with 1. Put the optional functionality into separate
run-time loadable files. SGI's
Honest -- I hadn't read all the threads before my post...
Great ideas Micah! :-)
On the idea of 2 wgets -- there is a clever way to get
by with 1. Put the optional functionality into separate
run-time loadable files. SGI's Unix (and MS Windows) do this.
The small wget then checks to see which
On 10/30/07, Micah Cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Tony Godshall wrote:
Perhaps the little wget could be called wg. A quick google and
wikipedia search shows no real namespace collisions.
To reduce confusion/upgrade problems, I would think
On 10/26/07, Josh Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/26/07, Micah Cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And, of course, when I say there would be two Wgets, what I really
mean by that is that the more exotic-featured one would be something
else entirely than a Wget, and would have a separate
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Tony Godshall wrote:
Perhaps the little wget could be called wg. A quick google and
wikipedia search shows no real namespace collisions.
To reduce confusion/upgrade problems, I would think we would want to
ensure that the traditional/little Wget
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Daniel Stenberg wrote:
I guess I'm not the man to ask nor comment this a lot, but look what I
found:
http://www.mail-archive.com/wget@sunsite.dk/msg01129.html
I've always thought and I still believe that wget's power and most
appreciated
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Josh Williams wrote:
Although the code might
suck for those trying to read it, I think it could be very great with
a little regular maintenance.
Oh, I think it's probably already earned a reputation for greatness at
this point. But yeah, it
On Fri, 26 Oct 2007, Micah Cowan wrote:
The obvious solution to that is to use c-ares, which does exactly that:
handle DNS queries asynchronously. Actually, I didn't know this until just
now, but c-ares was split off from ares to meet the needs of the curl
developers. :)
We needed an asynch
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
With talk of supporting multiple simultaneous connections in a
next-generation version of Wget, various things have been tumbling
around in my mind.
First off is that I would not wish to do such a thing with threads.
Threads introduce too many
On 10/26/07, Micah Cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And, of course, when I say there would be two Wgets, what I really
mean by that is that the more exotic-featured one would be something
else entirely than a Wget, and would have a separate name.
I think the idea of having two Wgets is good. I
16 matches
Mail list logo
