Post a reply

Options
Add an Attachment

If you do not want to add an Attachment to your Post, please leave the Fields blank.

(maximum 10 MB; please compress large files; only common media, archive, text and programming file formats are allowed)

Options

Topic review

Guest

Re: Output redirection for WinSCP.exe... not WinSCP./com

martin wrote:

Do not use /timeout switch on command line for scripting. Use -timeout switch of open command:
https://winscp.net/eng/docs/scriptcommand_open

To answer your questions:
1) No way to use output redirection with winscp.exe. That's restrictions imposed by Windows.
2) winscp.com does support /timeout switch, but it's deliberately not documented as it is not recommended to do that.


Thanks for the clarification. Setting the timeout at the open command makes sense.
martin

Re: Output redirection for WinSCP.exe... not WinSCP./com

Do not use /timeout switch on command line for scripting. Use -timeout switch of open command:
https://winscp.net/eng/docs/scriptcommand_open

To answer your questions:
1) No way to use output redirection with winscp.exe. That's restrictions imposed by Windows.
2) winscp.com does support /timeout switch, but it's deliberately not documented as it is not recommended to do that.
Guest

Is there support for controlling the verbosity of scripted logging with WinSCP.exe?
Jason

Output redirection for WinSCP.exe... not WinSCP./com

Hi,

I am trying to incorporate a timeout parameter (/timeout=90) into my batch file. I know that WinSCP.com does not support this but WinSCP.exe does. What WinSCP.exe does not support is output redirection, and the /log option is far too verbose. I am incorporating the WinSCP response into the log of my batch file, so I need to have the appropriate amount of information sent back (redirection was a good amount).

Is there a way to incorporate output redirection into WinSCP.exe or have have less verbose logging? If WinSCP.com would accept /timeout parameters then that would be fine too.

This is my first time using either tool in this way, so hopefully I am not missing anything here.

Thanks,
Jason