Subject: Re: codeconv v3 - kernel code set recoding engine
To: Jaromir Dolecek <email@example.com>
From: Greywolf <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 03/02/2000 19:24:27
On Thu, 2 Mar 2000, Jaromir Dolecek wrote:
# Why is something like this necessary ?
# Well, several filesystems (MSDOSFS, Joliet CD9660, NTFS) use natively
# Unicode for filenames [*] and kernel has to translate the filename
# to something sane to keep happy all the code and utlities expecting
# classic Unix 8bit filename.
At the risk of sounding heretic, I'm wondering why the *ix crowd
has stuck with 8-bit characters for paths, and for how long is it
going to be the "standard"? It certainly makes for some complication
to have to support two branches of a kernel (one for 8-bit, one for
16-bit pathnames) if, as I have seen before in another incarnation,
one needs to support a non-western language.
I rather suspect it would be a wise move to explore this soon.
BSD: Got source?