Talk:HTTrack

Latest comment: 11 years ago by Xroche in topic Bugs Section

Please review my English edit

Please review my English!!!--Alex brollo 01:42, 23 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

This article may read slightly like an advertisement, but there is nothing to be gained by the makers of HTTrack by you using the software since it's GNU licensed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.233.124.151 (talk) 21:29, 5 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

It doesn't explain what "recursively" means or what a "chron job" is. So it's a pretty obscure advert. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.47.125.194 (talk) 22:17, 7 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

Bugs Section edit

The wording of the 'Bugs' Section is strange and looks like original research.

'It can be used for small websites only which can be downloaded all at once' - well, what does that mean? I've personally used the update feature successfully.

'HTTrack is unable to interpret the HTTP header "Content-Type" correctly'. Maybe true, but this this seems to be the design of the program, and hence not a bug.

Citations needed, please, before adding this kind of material. 222.239.174.26 (talk) 03:00, 23 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Bug regarding --continue or --update needs to be removed. Post-3.23 versions of HTTrack have the bug fixed. Tatsh (talk) 06:10, 20 July 2008 (UTC)Reply


Note from the author: httrack is definitely able to interpret the HTTP header "Content-Type" correctly ; you can test this by mirroring these two URls:

httrack "http://www.httrack.com/test_type2/get.htm?1234" "http://www.httrack.com/test_type/fake_image.gif"

Will correctly produce "fake_image.html" and "get81dc.gif"

And regarding the update issue, this was currently only reproduced because of a corrupted index, and/or server-side problems (dynamic pages not handling update requests correctly)

--Xavier Roche (talk) 11:15, 17 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

I removed the section. -- BenRG (talk) 01:25, 26 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

The main website is down, does anyone know the status of the developers? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.232.83.206 (talk) 07:40, 20 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Lack of citable sources edit

Note from the author of HTTrack (xroche): I do not know whether it may be considered as citable source (and I won't discuss on the opportunity to keep the page - due to obvious conflicts of interest!), but several studies and/or pages are citing (sometimes very briefly - the main topic is not generally httrack itself) httrack:

And brief citations from the following sources:

  • Penetration Tester's Open Source Toolkit - Jeremy Faircloth (ISBN 978-1597496278)
  • How to Start A Home-Based Web Design Business, 4th - Jim Smith (ISBN 978-0762759552)
  • Placing the Suspect Behind the Keyboard: Using Digital Forensics and Investigative Techniques to Identify Cybercrime Suspects - Brett Shavers (ISBN 978-1597499859)
  • Malware Forensic Field Guide for Windows Systems: Digital Forensics Field Guides - Cameron H. Malin, James M. Aquilina, Eoghan Casey (ISBN 978-1597494724)

Other "online-only" citations:

Again, these may not be considered as sources, depending on what is considered as a valid source. And the cited samples are neither exhaustive, nor necessarily perfectly representative. Xavier Roche (talk) 08:19, 7 March 2013 (UTC)Reply