Subject: Re: Unicode support in iso9660.
To: der Mouse <mouse@Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA>
From: Jaromir Dolecek <jdolecek@NetBSD.org>
Date: 11/22/2004 22:34:50
der Mouse wrote:
> > Maybe I didn't follow this discussion closely enough, but did Jaromir
> > propose to do this (breaking FFS for people using it for other than
> > UTF-8)?
> I'm not certain - but someone did, and it seemd to me that Jaromir was
> arguing in favour of it.
Just for record, I'm not in favour of a transparent, locale
dependant file name transcoding. IMO having file names change
with user locale would be an administrative madness.
> Specifically, the proposal as I saw it was to declare, by fiat, that
> the user<->kernel ABI would operate on UTF8-encoded character
> sequences, rather than the octet sequences we have today - which of
> course would affect (the userland interface to) all filesystems in use.
> Including FFS, if any are mounted.
My primary aim is to have a reasonable way to handle file systems
which use Unicode as it's internal file name character set. UTF8
is clearly one of the best choices here, since it's the only standard
UNIX-compatible way to handle full Unicode range.
I stay fully content with FFS/ext2fs/lfs to be file name encoding
Jaromir Dolecek <jdolecek@NetBSD.org> http://www.NetBSD.cz/
-=- We can walk our road together if our goals are all the same; -=-
-=- We can run alone and free if we pursue a different aim. -=-