Herold Heiko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > But if I understand this correctly (sorry, sources not checked, foot > in mouth ecc.) with -k wget still needs to correct the html files > later, when it knows what has been downloaded and what not. So it > can't print the file as soon as downloaded, only at the end.
You are correct. `-k' would be at odds with any kind of streaming simply because it needs to process all the HTMLs after the fact. Regardless of other things, that breaks the streaming. >> On technical grounds, it might be hard to shoehorn Wget's mode of >> operation into what `tar' expects. For example, Wget might need to >> revisit directories in random order. I'm not sure if a tar stream >> is allowed to do that. > > A simple |sort should fix that, You're misunderstanding me. In my thought experiment, I meant that Wget output might be a tar stream itself, not a list of file names to feed to `tar'. > I agree with the idea "do one thing and do it well", after all we > are not talking about a windows gui try-to-do-everything program > here. Either I did not understand you correctly, or a simple list of > files should be enough for every case. You didn't understand me, but you proposed something far better. Yes, something equivalent to `find''s `-print'/`-print0' would actually help the original poster. > Or did you mean something else with "serialization of the result" ? A tar stream is an example of serialization of a set of files and directories. It turns an on-disk structure into a stream of bytes that can be transferred over a pipe or a network in order to re-create something resembling the original structure.
