Linux - SoftwareThis forum is for Software issues.
Having a problem installing a new program? Want to know which application is best for the job? Post your question in this forum.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Introduction to Linux - A Hands on Guide
This guide was created as an overview of the Linux Operating System, geared toward new users as an exploration tour and getting started guide, with exercises at the end of each chapter.
For more advanced trainees it can be a desktop reference, and a collection of the base knowledge needed to proceed with system and network administration. This book contains many real life examples derived from the author's experience as a Linux system and network administrator, trainer and consultant. They hope these examples will help you to get a better understanding of the Linux system and that you feel encouraged to try out things on your own.
Click Here to receive this Complete Guide absolutely free.
I am trying to sort something out in my head. If I want a local mirror of some directory, I usually do not want the lead-in. Take, for example my local slackware (and everything) mirror, which is
I would get a directory starting ftp.heanet.ie/ with an unpredictable number of unwanted branches. What I would like is one directory slackware64-<version> with it's files.
I read the first 20 screenfuls of the man page and glazed over. I imagine rsync would do it. No, I don't want a synced copy, I just want a download. wget is not into syncing copies, and it's research, not porn, so I didn't was the encrypt --> decrypt that goes on with some copy schemes, because it slows matters.
I read the first 20 screenfuls of the man page and glazed over. I imagine rsync would do it. No, I don't want a synced copy, I just want a download. wget is not into syncing copies, and it's research, not porn, so I didn't was the encrypt --> decrypt that goes on with some copy schemes, because it slows matters.
Well, if the information was right in front of you but "made your eyes glaze over" we may not be of much help.
But
I get the impression that a clone of the path is not what you want.
What it appears that you want will be a cone (snapshot) of the folder that is your source. You do NOT want "sync" so your original word choice may have been misleading.
Rsync is surprisingly good at that, and encryption is not what slows you down on modern processors. Lftp is also good, and both have specific options that make them excellent tools for this purpose. Also, there are excellent tutorials that describe options for almost exactly your use case!
To use ANY tool properly you will have to learn to read the documentation and understand at least some of how it works. If you want to make wget work for this, you can. You are going to have to find some of the options that might work, run some test transfers, and find your solution. Once you actually make a start, let us know what you did and what happened so we can advise you.
You're right, lftp would be a superior was to go. It's not always the same site.
I certainly don't want a clone of a website, more a mirror of one particular small branch (sometimes with subdirs, sometimes not). Browsers are also effective at it. I got used to operating under fierce stress and pressure - now gone - and I find my threshold for bilge has deteriorated. If you lit a fire under my backside, I suppose I could assimilate and process bilge as well as formerly; It's rarely you hear someone complain about a lack of pressure :-P.
Distribution: Debian testing/sid; OpenSuSE; Fedora; Mint
Posts: 5,513
Rep:
Wget is good if you have to use http, like on web sites that don't intend to be mirrored by the general public. Rsync is probably the best, if the site permits rsync.
Wget has a switch to save the download in whatever directory name you want, not necessarily the domain name. But rsync can exclude whatever you want with the --exclude switch.
Last edited by AwesomeMachine; 11-14-2017 at 12:51 AM.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.