Michelle Konzack wrote:
> Am 2008-10-14 01:20:16, schrieb Hraban Luyat:
>> Hi,
>> Considering the -m switch (--mirror): the man page says it is currently
>> equivalent to -r -N -l inf --no-remove-listing. I was wondering, though:
>> why does this not also include -k? When mirroring a website it seems
>> useful to convert the links for appropriate viewing in a browser. That
> When mirroring a Website, I WANT A IDENTICAL MIRROR.  But IF I  want  to
> have a mirror for Off-Line reading I can choose the additional -k otion.

So your interpretation of the word "mirror" means "byte-by-byte copy"
(also called a "backup" or an "archive"). Another common interpretation,
however, is an "alternative location", suitable for "off-site" (which I
assume you mean, here, too, instead of "off-line") viewing, as in "If
that website is unavailable, try one of the following mirrors: ...".

>> is, if mirroring here means what it usually means: provide an
>> alternative location to view the same content.. if it's more like a
>> backup, then of course -k is not a good option. But in that case, maybe
>> it's worth mentioning...?
> No!  ;-)

My point was that the meaning of "mirror" is very ambiguous,
/especially/ in the context of fetching a live website in this fashion
(as one could expect a backup to occur on the server-side instead). I am
not arguing that the -k switch should be added as much as that I'm just
saying it might very well be worth mentioning.

>> PS: I would like to be CC'ed (not subscribed).
> ???  --  How can you post without being subscribed?  My posts  went  all
> definitively rejected when I tried to post to this list.



Hraban Luyat

Reply via email to