> > I even though that maybe the website is generating 
the 
> > index.html pages 'on the fly' and itself is 
> > occasionally sending out the wrong extension, but 
> 
> Yes, there is a difference between a link directly 
>to a certain file (eg: href='/files/test.exe') and a 
>page which dynamically redirects the browser to a 
>file.


No, they don't appear to be redirected.  The links 
appear to be a direct, ordinary link.

I was meaning that maybe the server is taking the 
directory as it is at that particular time and 
generating an index.html and that sometimes it gets it 
wrong.

That during the creation of index.html, sometimes it 
gets the link description text right (ie: .dll, .cab, 
etc.) but it gets the actual link extension wrong.  
(But if that was so, then the file wouldn't download.  
But it does.)

I know that sounds odd, but it's either that or 
WinHTTrack is really screwed up.  (Maybe in the area 
where it takes the index page from the server and 
rewrites the links as local.  Or in its recognition 
of .html vs. everything else.)

When WinHTTrack shows the files its downloading, it 
looks correct, with a correct extension.  But it 
doesn't get saved that way.  Nor is the local, 
modified version of the index.html correct.  I've 
never caught the server itself with wrong links 
(although I haven't checked all of them over and over, 
like WinHTTrack does.)

And in the download display, when you click on it to 
see the download information, it shows it being 
treated as text. Where as when it's working right, 
it's binary (or whatever it's supposed to be.)


I've pretty much had enough, though.  I've spent about 
a week trying to get it to work right and download the 
rest.  I've decided to look for something better.  
Heck, I'll download each and every one of the 1,000+ 
files by hand if I have to.  It'd be easier!