-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Matthias Vill wrote: >> Should --spider imply --recursive? > > I guess many people expect it to behave that way (and therefore I think > it is a good idea that the output "complains" on not using --recursive, > but still some may want to have a single-file-checking-option. So we > would waste functionality if we would force --recursive on. > > Maybe the message that you used --spider without --recursive can be > tweaked to state it's ok not to use --recursive.
I'm not convinced. To me, the name "spider" implies recursion, and it's counter-intuitive for it not to. As to wasted functionality, what's wrong with "-O /dev/null" (or NUL or whatever) for simply checking existence? Still, it's a significant change in behavior. But my gut says that a mention in NEWS is good enough for that. - -- Micah J. Cowan Programmer, musician, typesetting enthusiast, gamer... http://micah.cowan.name/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFGxqLU7M8hyUobTrERCPK+AJ0f+LOSa/YN6H/Ma4LTaZe54TRdewCfb8SD +8LaHomNbTkkfFfAdQIsHJQ= =j+9o -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
