Re: Wishlist: support the file:/// protocol

2006-06-25 Thread David
In replies to the post requesting support of the “file://” scheme, requests were made for someone to provide a compelling reason to want to do this. Perhaps the following is such a reason.I have a CD with HTML content (it is a CD of abstracts from a scientific conference), however for space r

building wget 1.10.2 using eclipse FC4/linux

2006-06-25 Thread bruce
hi.. i'm also playing around with building wget 1.10.2, using FC4/Eclipse IDE. i can build wget using the configure/make/make install process... however, when i try to create a managed eclipse project, and i try to configure eclipse so that it compiles/builds the wget app, i'm running into issues

RE: 1.11 Alpha 1 Win32 files

2006-06-25 Thread bruce
hi chris... i've just started to try to build wget on an old visual studio 6 windows system... i'm getting errors... any ideas as to how i should/might proceed... does anyone have an actual vis studio project workspace for wget... thanks -bruce -Original Message- From: Christopher G.

1.11 Alpha 1 Win32 files

2006-06-25 Thread Christopher G. Lewis
Hi all - I've published the latest alpha Win32 binaries using a similar format to Heiko's Win32 page. Hopefully I'll be able to keep up with what Heiko's done in the past, which has been excellent. Heiko deserves a big round of cheers for his work. The location for the downloads will be http

building wget 1.10.2 for msoft windows..

2006-06-25 Thread bruce
hi.. i'm playing around with building wget 1.10.2 on msoft windows 2000, using visual studio 6 (i know.. it's old!!) i copied the wget source from the web. i ran the configure.bat, followed by nmake and got a compile error in the http.c/rc.c files... i then created a msoft console poroject, usin

Re: License of wget.texi: suggest removal of invariant sections

2006-06-25 Thread Noèl Köthe
Am Montag, den 12.06.2006, 15:17 -0700 schrieb Don Armstrong: Hello Hrvoje and Mauro, > > I understand and agree with the reasoning behind removing the GPL as > > the invariant section; but why also remove the GFDL as an invariant > > section? > > That's just because having the GFDL as an invari