This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.
add an option --exclude-links analog to --exclude-docs but instead of excluding parsing a document exclude a link for checking. For example running checklink locally a regexp of "^http:" would exclude all remote link checking. Add the following line after: next if ($u =~ m/^mailto:/); next if ($u =~ $Opts{Exclude_Links});
Hello Ville, Did you have a chance to add this. I was thinking of adding a --staywithin option. (I see this as a way to say - stay on our web servers. So links out are checked but not followed in recursion) ex --staywithin *.amd.com For 4.2.1 code - I assume this goes in the sub in_recursion_scope() Is that correct? (as I see the mailto filter (in 4.2.1) is applied when it builds the list of broken links) -Bruce
No, this has not been implemented yet, I'll look into it. Regarding --staywithin, the recursion scope is already limited to the base URI and below of the initial document by default, and can be controlled using the --location option. I'm considering improving that by making it possible to specify multiple recursion bases by specifying --location more than once.
Yes, I ran into this base and location issue testing http://www.amd.com/us-en/ this main page points to other key amd URIs enterprise.amd.com amdlive.amd.com search.amd.com I am looking to have recursive check any link found under amd.com/us-en/ but stays within *.amd.com Is there a way with the current --location option (4.2.1) to say - check all links (as a page) that have *.amd.com in them? (so it does not get stuck under http://www.amd.com/us-en/) -Bruce
(In reply to comment #3) > Is there a way with the current --location option (4.2.1) to say - > check all links (as a page) that have *.amd.com in them? I'm afraid there isn't. This is getting off topic for this particular bug/RFE, and Bugzilla is not a good tool to facilitate discussion in the first place. So please use the www-validator mailing list for discussions, and open new bugs for new issues, thanks in advance.
Bug 689 is actually the same as this one - marking this one as a duplicate because the other has some votes on it already. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 689 ***