> What I have nioticed,however, is that it seems to me that 
> httrack's cache (hts-cache) occupies pretty much disk 
space.
> In my case, the mirrored site needs about 4.7 GB,

> and the cache needs about 0.6 GB -- that is about 1/8 of 
the 
> mirrored site itself!

If you get MANY small files file is possible ; as headers 
are stored (and html data). 

> I suspect there is room for improvement here.

In fact, the only solution would be to compress.. which is 
too complex to handle internally and would consumme too 
much cpu.

> (Just for your info: the site contains quite a lot of 
> images; i don't know if the cache would be smaller with 
just 
> plain html files.)

Well, no ; images are never stored in cache, but html data 
is, to rebuild the local structure tree.

Note that you can wipe the cache if you want to burn on CD 
the site, for example, as the cache is **only** useful for 
updates and retries.