websocat
Command-line client for WebSockets, like netcat (or curl) for ws:// with advanced socat-like functions
Runssource: GitHubRustMITcommit 3a3574cd2f5d
Rust, MIT licensed. The project labels itself: cli, command line, command line tool, curl, netcat, proxy, rfc 6455 and socat.
websocat runs. An Argusic agent installed it in 8 minutes and hit no errors on a clean machine with no GPU, and the whole session was recorded.
websocat 1.14.1 compiles from source, binary serves WebSocket connections and passes all 7 integration tests (trivial, tcp, ws, ws_ll, ws_persist, unix, abstract_)
What the agent ended up with on a clean machine, in its own words. How this is measured
Measured by Argusic on a fresh machine every time. Every number links to its evidence. Argusic Score 100 of 100 (the mean of this project's run scores).
At a glance
Subject data from GitHub, linked at the top of this page, refreshed . Test data by Argusic (CC BY 4.0); every number links to a run page with the full log, the recording, and their sha256 hashes.
What was measured
From the run that decided this verdict. Every line is a recorded value, not an estimate.
- Install time
- 8 minutes
- Cold machine to finish
- 2 minutes
- Errors hit and fixed
- 0 hit, 0 fixed with no human help
- How the result was proved
- cargo test --test test: 7 passed, 0 failed; smoke test: websocat -t ws-l:127.0.0.1:19924 mirror: piped to websocat -1 ws://127.0.0.1:19924 returned echoed text correctly; test.sh: all subtests passed including timing verification
- Model tokens used
- 140,209
- Exact commit tested
- 3a3574cd2f5d
- Container image
- sha256:cdd920bce783
What was not measured
The other half, so you can see exactly how far this evidence goes. A gap is printed as a gap and never filled in.
- Peak GPU memory
- this ran on a CPU machine, so there was no GPU to sample
- Behaviour over a long run
- each attempt uses the smallest documented settings and a fixed time budget, so this measures whether it runs, not how it holds up under load
Watch the session
The whole run, from a clean machine, at the speed it actually happened. Nothing is cut and nothing is sped up.
A recording of attempt 2, run . The verdict above comes from a different attempt, so read this as one session and not as the current result. The terminal recording it was made from is the evidence, stored with a sha256 fingerprint; the video is a rendering of it. Nothing loads from the video host until you press play.
The end of the recording
The last lines of the terminal session that decided this verdict, exactly as they were recorded.
test tcp ... ok
test ws ... ok
test ws_ll ... ok
test ws_persist ... ok
test result: ok. 7 passed; 0 failed; 0 ignored; 0 measured; 0 filtered out; finished in 0.62s
All 7 tests passed. Let me compile the final result.
exec
/bin/sh -lc "echo '{\"install_succeeded\": true, \"launch_succeeded\": true, \"install_minutes\": 8…
succeeded in 0ms:
{"install_succeeded": true, "launch_succeeded": true, "install_minutes": 8, "errors": [], "test_dep…
tokens used
140,209Replay the whole session, every command from a clean machine to this point.
How it was tested
One agent, one container, no human help. It installs the project the way its own documentation says to, runs it, and fixes what breaks. Everything below is recorded as it happened: the terminal session, the log and the exact commit. The full method.
Strengths and limits
Measured facts, not opinions. How this is written.
What went well
- Reached a running state on a clean machine, with the session recorded.
- Nothing broke on the way: zero errors between clone and running.
- Ran without a GPU, so it does not need one to start.
- Licensed MIT, as reported by its host.
- Measured 3 times, so the result is not a one-off.
What did not, or is not known
- Took 8 minutes to install, slower than the median of the 123 comparable projects Argusic has measured.
Of the 124 cli projects Argusic has installed and timed, websocat was the 86th fastest to reach a running state, and 111 of 124 reached one at all.
What it is a reasonable choice for
- Trying it on a laptop or a small server: it reached a running state without a GPU.
- A quick evaluation: it was running 8 minutes after the clone.
- Following its own README: the documented path worked with nothing to fix.
Also tested, in the same area
Every one of these was installed and run by Argusic on a clean machine. Nothing appears here that was not tested.
Run history
Topics (from GitHub)
clicommand-linecommand-line-toolcurlnetcatproxyrfc-6455socatwebsocket-clientwebsocket-serverwebsockets
Embed the badge
Markdown for the project README. It links back here; terms on the terms page.
[](https://argusic.com/subject/websocat)Questions
- Does websocat run?
- Yes. websocat runs. Argusic installed and launched it on a clean machine in 8 minutes, hitting 0 errors on the way, and recorded the session.
- How did Argusic test websocat?
- On a fresh, disposable machine, with every command recorded and the repository pinned at commit 3a3574cd2f5d. 3 attempts are recorded, and the full method is on the methodology page.
- What did it cost to test websocat?
- The run that produced this verdict cost $0.02: real compute and model cost, not a list price per million tokens. It is recorded on that run's page.
- How long does websocat take to install?
- 8 minutes in the run that decided this verdict, from a clean machine to a running state. That is one measured attempt, not an average.
- Does websocat need a GPU?
- Not to start. Argusic reached a running state on a machine with no GPU.
- What goes wrong when installing websocat?
- Nothing did, in the recorded run: zero errors between clone and running.
- How does websocat compare with the alternatives?
- Of the 124 cli projects Argusic has installed and timed, websocat was the 86th fastest to reach a running state, and 111 of 124 reached one at all.
- Where is the evidence for websocat?
- All 3 recorded runs are on this page, each linking to its full log and terminal recording, stored with a sha256 fingerprint so it cannot be quietly altered.