lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Feb]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: UTF-8 practically vs. theoretically in the VFS API (was: Re: JFS default behavior)
    Quote from Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>:
    >
    >
    > On Tue, 17 Feb 2004, John Bradford wrote:
    > >
    > > Why not:
    >
    > I'll start with the first one. That already kills the rest.
    >
    > > * State that filenames are strings of 32-bit words. UCS-4 should be
    > > the prefered format for storing text in them, but storing legacy
    > > encodings in the low 8 bits is acceptable, (but a Bad Thing for new
    > > installations).
    >
    > UCS-4 is as braindamaged as UCS-2 was, and for all the same reasons.
    >
    > It's bloated, non-expandable, and not backwards compatible.

    Which I hardly see as real pain for filenames, especially as I covered
    the backward compatibility bit anyway, and wanting to expand beyond
    2^31 characters isn't really on my to-do list at the moment, which
    just leaves filename bloat, which is laughably trivial in at least
    99.9% of cases, and probably just a minor inconvenience the other
    0.1%.

    But, I don't think I care anymore, anyway, clearly we are going to end
    up with UTF-8 filenames everywhere, and security vulnerabilities to go
    with them, and as long as I'm aware of that fact, I should be OK.

    John.
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 14:01    [W:4.159 / U:0.076 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site