Are we talkin about a temporary fix or the real solution here ? As a temporary fix changing other characters to @ would work somewhat I'd say, at least for some conditions - but not a perfect solution, in this way some%file and some?file both would map to some@file, not good. Better than nothing if people want this as a temporary fix. Heiko
-- -- PREVINET S.p.A. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Via Ferretto, 1 ph x39-041-5907073 -- I-31021 Mogliano V.to (TV) fax x39-041-5907087 -- ITALY > -----Original Message----- > From: Ian Abbott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 11:48 AM > To: Wget List > Subject: RE: Mapping URLs to filenames > > > On 16 Jan 2002 at 8:02, David Robinson (AU) wrote: > > > In the meantime, however, '?' is problematic for Win32 > users. It stops WGET > > from working properly whenever it is found within a URL. > Can we fix it > > please. > > My proposal for using escape sequences in filenames for problem > characters is up for discussion at the moment, but I'm not sure if > they really need to be reversible (except that it helps to reduce > the chances of different URLs being saved to the same filename). > > Would it be sufficient to map all illegal characters to '@'? For > Windows, the code already changes '%' to '@' and it could just as > easily change '*', '?', etc. to '@' as well. >
