Thanks for the reply Steven. I've since discovered that using wget with HTTP of course cannot preserve permissions as is has no idea what they are!
I had a strange idea that maybe they could be read in the header somehow, but was sorely mistaken. I've just added a chmod into my script after the wget instead :-) On 28/02/07, Steven M. Schweda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
From Andrew Hall: As usual, it might help to have some basic information, like the wget version, the system type and OS on which it's being run, and an actual wget command. > I notice when using wget -O that execute permissions on files are not > preserved. With "-O", wget opens the output file before it talks to the server, so it doesn;t have that information at that time. Wget (including with "-O") allows a user to fetch multiple files with one command. Whose file permissions would you like it to use? "-O" does not work the way many (most?) people seem to think that it does, which leads to faulty expectations. > So a file which on the webserver is rwxr-xr-x will be written as > rw-r--r-- With your umask, I'd expect that _any_ file which you can get the Web server to send will be written with rw-r--r--. In most cases, file permissions on a Web server are not even available to the client. An FTP server is more likely to supply this kind of info. > Is this intentional? I'd say it was more accidental than intentional. > Is there a way I can preserve execute permissions? The easiest way might be to use FTP and not "-O". Which do you like better after a download, "mv" or "chmod"? And how do you know which permissions the file had originally? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Steven M. Schweda [EMAIL PROTECTED] 382 South Warwick Street (+1) 651-699-9818 Saint Paul MN 55105-2547
