Re: curl vs wget
Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2007 11:25:31 +0200 (CEST)
On Fri, 5 Oct 2007, Sergei Steshenko wrote:
> I don't understand your logic.
> cURL does both download and upload, right ?
> wget does just download, wput - just upload.
> If you insist on comparing cURL <-> wget, why did you choose wget and wput ?
I didn't. I "insist" on comparing curl with wget. Two tools with partly
overlapping functionality and also two tools that people tend to mention
together in a pair and two tools that people tend to ask me about for a
> That is, why did you choose only download-capable counterpart and not only
> upload-capable counterpart ?
Because that's how curl and wget compare.
> Since wget and wput are complementary tools which, when combined in a
> "bundle", make possible both download and upload, it looks logical to
> compare cURL to (wget + wput).
I disagree. wget is not at all related to wput (except that the wput project
picked a name that can make people think there is a relationship), so wget is
complementary with wput just as much as with any other ftp upload capable
tool. Like curl.
-- Commercial curl and libcurl Technical Support: http://haxx.se/curl.htmlReceived on 2007-10-05