> <snip>
>
> So, I'm a bit stuck in a tough place. The previous behavior surprised
> a set of users and so does the new. Further, I could possibly make
> non-2xx codes not store zero byte files, but should -o behavior
> really care about HTTP response codes and won't that just be even
> harder to explain and for users to figure out?
>
> I hesitate to even suggest it (because of the option bloat we
> already suffer
> from), but does it need another command line option to get this
> solved for both sets of use cases?
>
> I could really use some fresh ideas and opinions. Especially if you
> use one of these versions! Tell me what you think!
>

Seems to me that looking at the return from curl:
echo $?
should be enough to tell the user whether or not the file should be
zero bytes; that's what I do. At fist, a user might become
incredulous, esp if their browser downloads a very large file, just
someone misunderstanding how the web works, and they could really
benefit from the experience, often I find that I need
to add -L to curls command line.
As you pointed out, there is no one solution for both parties, so, why
try to hide this from the user, gates ordered you to?

David
-------------------------------------------------------------------
List admin: http://cool.haxx.se/list/listinfo/curl-users
FAQ: http://curl.haxx.se/docs/faq.html
Etiquette: http://curl.haxx.se/mail/etiquette.html
Received on 2015-08-27