[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Bug-wget] --progress should not be overridden by --quiet

From: Darshit Shah
Subject: Re: [Bug-wget] --progress should not be overridden by --quiet
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2014 15:35:15 +0100

We have a user in Fedora (
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1068834)
> which thinks that --progress option should not be overridden by the --quiet
> option.
> The rationale behind this is that when users run a script then they may
> want to see the progress of potentially long download, but don't want
> to be informed for example about 302 redirections.
> I understand the motivation behind such a request. I can cite another use
case too.
Sometimes you have an external application calling Wget to download
multiple files.
Often times, all you want to see is the progress status and nothing else.
This is
something I use regularly for downloading the update packages on my Arch

The reporter of the Fedora bug would like to see the progress bar on stdout,
> but as Micah Cowan stated it is really bad idea, mainly because stdout is
> intended for core data (especially when using "wget -O -".

> As an example idea, the ability to pass the descriptor number to the
> --progress
> option was proposed, for example "--progress=bar,1" or any other.

I would instead try to introduce a new verbosity level which is more like
I'm not sure how everyone here feels about editing the output in
--non-verbose mode.
I have seen a few feature requests for changing --non-verbose to display
the progress bar

> Although I think that the request seems to be valid, I personally think the
> current behaviour is correct. It seems more like a feature request.

I think this is a valid feature request. Currently, I am maintaining a
separate patch-set
which causes Wget to output, to stderr, only the progress bar when passed
the -nv
switch. It is not production quality, but if there is a demand for the
same, I could clean
it up and submit a patch.

Thanking You,
Darshit Shah

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]