Hrvoje Niksic wrote:
Mauro Tortonesi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
the following patch (just commited into the trunk) should solve the
problem.
I don't think that patch is such a good idea.
-O, as currently implemented, is simply a way to specify redirection.
You can think of it as analogous to "command > file" in the shell. In
that light, leaving empty files makes perfect sense (that's what shell
does with "nosuchcommand > foo").
Most people, on the other hand, expect -O to simply change the
destination file name of the current download (and fail to even
consider what should happen when multiple URLs are submitted to Wget).
For them, the current behavior doesn't make sense.
Until -O is changed to really just change the destination file name, I
believe the current behavior should be retained.
you might be actually right. the real problem here is that the semantics
of -O are too generic and not well-defined. as you say, we should split
the redirection and output filename functions in two different commands.
in this case, the redirection command would simply write all the
downloaded data to the output without performing any trasformation. on
the other hand, the output filename command could perform more complex
operations, like saving downloaded resources in a temporary file,
parsing them for new URLs (maybe also providing a programming hook for
external parsers) and writing the resources to their destination,
archiving them in a well defined format in case of multiple downloads.
what do you think?
--
Aequam memento rebus in arduis servare mentem...
Mauro Tortonesi http://www.tortonesi.com
University of Ferrara - Dept. of Eng. http://www.ing.unife.it
GNU Wget - HTTP/FTP file retrieval tool http://www.gnu.org/software/wget
Deep Space 6 - IPv6 for Linux http://www.deepspace6.net
Ferrara Linux User Group http://www.ferrara.linux.it
