Re: I don't think I've ever gotten Jigdo working
At 04:11 AM 1/26/2003 +0000, Tom Goulet wrote:
--snip--
I don't need to do that with Wget.
It appears that you really *like* wget and that no tool other than wget
will keep you happy. (Jigdo uses wget also.)
My advice then is to abandon jigdo - either the jigdo-lite version or the
jigdo-easy version that I favor.
--snip--
Jigdo (er, jigdo-lite anyways) stops after downloading ten packages, and
them makes an ISO image. It seemed to me that jigdo-lite was
malfunctioning. That would not have happened with Wget.
If this bother you (it bothered me) change the script where it says
download 10 files at a time. (Caution: there is a trailing blank on that line.)
I recommend you use wget...
> I found it easiest to Google for the missing file and download it to the
> working directory. Next time I restart Jigdo this file is picked up.
That sounds incredibly tedious. And, I don't need to do that with Wget.
...then use wget
I tried three sites, they all worked, they just didn't have all the
packages. Another problem that wouldn't happen with Wget.
...then use wget...
> ...I've described what I do. It's easy.
I wouldn't have to do that with Wget either.
...then use wget....
> >- I had to find an Rsync mirror
I wouldn't have had to do that with Wget either.
...then use wget....
I still wouldn't have had to do that with Wget.
> This *is* tough - use jigdo instead.
...then use wget...
Please excuse me while I yell. JIGDO DIDN'T WORK.
Pardon me ... Jidgo does work ... it just doesn't work exactly the same as
wget.
In your situation, I recommend wget.
*PAY ATTENTION* USE WGET!!
It's difficult when the computer you're running Jigdo on is not in your
house. And I would have been happy enough with the integrity of the
file if Wget had proceeded uninterrupted that I would not have needed to
bother the MD5 sum.
I'm on dial-up and my friend has a cable modem "all-you-can-eat"
connection. (240KBps from Los Angeles to Amsterdam last week.)
My friend runs Windows, by the way.
Regards, Gordon
Reply to: