Talk:Wget
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Categories
Is Wget really a FTP client ? It can get from a ftp server but I think it cannot put a file on the server Arno. 12:29, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- No mention of FTP upload as a feature[1] in 1.8.1 manual. But I think could still call it an FTP client, although not a very full featured one. I'm not a fan of categories anyway though. --Pmsyyz 18:30, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Wget is an FTP client in that it talks to FTP servers via the FTP protocol. It doesn't support upload, but it doesn't upload to HTTP either.
I've restored the "FTP clients" category because Wget really is an FTP client. I've removed the "Download managers" category because it's not really a download manager in the sense of GetRight, FlashGet and such. It is more of a one-shot downloading/mirroring agent. Hniksic 16:35, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Title case
Please don't change the case of the title (and of the occurrences of "Wget" in the page) to lower-case "wget". The program's name is "Wget" or "GNU Wget", with the first letter in upper-case. The entire Info and Man documentation and the web page confirm this. The title of this page is not an example of wikipedia's technical limitation. The only reason why the actual Unix executable is called "wget" is because Unix executables, by convention, consist of all-lowercase letters.
[edit] Considerate downloading is misplaced
The "considerate downloading" section doesn't sound like it belongs in this article. It doesn't really describe Wget, it's written in more of a tutorial style ("you should" do this or that), and it definitely doesn't belong under the "features" headline. 83.131.32.185 13:41, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Proper way to download from Wikipedia (or from any Wiki)
A description of the proper way to download entire pages of Wikipedia would be very useful and appreciated. --Lucas Gallindo 18:07, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] I don't think wget is a ftp client!
I don't think wget is a ftp client! Because the Chinese Great Fire Wall will not block anything via ftp. What it only do is to block something via http.
If you try to retrieve something , such as ftp://ftp.vim.org/pub/vim/pc/gvim70.exe, via wget(in the main land of China , of course), you will certainly be frustrated.
But if you employ a real ftp client such as lftp, then you will probably get what you want, ignoring the Great Fire Wall.
[edit] The criticism section is crazy
Most or all of those criticisms fail the WP:WEASEL criteria. Please fix or remove them. At a glance, it looks like some should be partially folded into the other sections of the article and the rest should be deleted. Gronky 14:59, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
- Ok, there were no objections or better suggestions, so below (between two horizontal bars) is a copy of the criticisms section I just removed from the article. The contents should be merged into the relevent parts of the article if/where appropriate. Gronky 21:09, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
==Criticisms of Wget== Several criticisms of Wget have recurred in public forums and mailing lists. The most important ones are:
- Wget supports few download protocols, especially compared to cURL or Net Transport. It doesn't support any of the media streaming protocols, such as mms and rtsp, nor the increasingly popular P2P protocols. While not supporting media protocols can be explained with their lack of specifications, it is also true that many see Wget's code base as being centered around HTTP and FTP.
- It has lagged behind with support for the more recent features of HTTP, FTP, and HTML. For example, it still uses HTTP/1.0, and is unable to download content referenced from JavaScript or from CSS. [2] [3] [4]
- It is not flexible enough to be used as tool for advanced scripting because its more advanced download modes operate in an all-or-nothing fashion—it cannot be made to do only part of the work and output the information needed to continue, which could then be filtered or otherwise processed by other programs. (Printing out just the list of URLs to download without actually fetching them would be an example of such output. [5]) This has led some people to use cURL for some tasks for which Wget might be otherwise useful.
- Wget is easily confused when mirroring complex sites, especially on repeated mirroring runs because it lacks a database where it would store metadata describing previous mirroring runs.
- Wget's development has often been perceived as slow and sporadic; many users have been frustrated by the lack of response to feature requests. An example of this would be the inclusion of large file support, which happened in 2005, although the feature has been widely and frequently requested since at least 2002. [6] [7]
- Wget's large number of options has been criticized as feature creep — as of this writing (June 2005), Wget has more than 100 command-line switches. Although the options are well-documented in the manual, they are daunting even to the experienced user, and the interaction of various options can sometimes lead to surprises.
- Several security flaws have been exposed in Wget. [8] [9] [10] Although the flaws have not adversely affected the majority of users and have since been corrected, it has been claimed that the code base was not written with security in mind and that the maintainers are insufficiently sensitive to security-related concerns.
Wget's maintainers have stated their awareness of these criticisms, and claim to be working on addressing them in future releases.
