On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 11:23:20AM +0000, Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS wrote: > > I'm not even convinced that it's a good idea to force file names to be > in UTF-8. Perhaps it would be simpler and more robust to let file > names be any null-terminated string of octets and just recommend that > people use (some normalisation form of) UTF-8. That way you won't have > the problem of some files (with ill-formed names) being visible > locally but not remotely because the server or the client is either > blocking the names or "normalising" them in some weird and unexpected > way.
Certainly, this kind of normalization is evil and should be avoided. Normalization I am thinking about should ensure the filenames are stored on the server in as sane a way as possible. Once the filename is written to the fs, it should remain there and transparently _without any change_ be exported to clients (be it just a program doing open() or a remote network client). It could be changed via mount option, like current linux NLS implementation, but in no other way. -- ----------------------------------------------------------- | Radovan Garabik http://melkor.dnp.fmph.uniba.sk/~garabik/ | | __..--^^^--..__ garabik @ melkor.dnp.fmph.uniba.sk | ----------------------------------------------------------- Antivirus alert: file .signature infected by signature virus. Hi! I'm a signature virus! Copy me into your signature file to help me spread! -- Linux-UTF8: i18n of Linux on all levels Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-utf8/
