Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: A Great Idea (tm) about reimplementing NLS. | From | Måns Rullgård <> | Date | Sun, 19 Jun 2005 01:22:56 +0200 |
| |
Lukasz Stelmach <stlman@poczta.fm> writes:
> Måns Rullgård napisał(a): >>>>What do you do if the underlying filesystem can not store some unicode >>>>characters that are allowed on others? >>> >>>That's why UTF-8 is suggested. UTF-8 has been developed to "fool" the >>>software that need not to be aware of unicodeness of the text it manages >>>to handle it without any hickups *and* to store in the text information >>>about multibyte characters.What characters exactly you do mean? NULL? >>>There is no NULL byte in any UTF-8 string except the one which >>>terminates it. >> >> That's exactly how ext3, reiserfs, xfs, jfs, etc. all work. A few >> filesystems are tagged as using some specific encoding. If your >> filesystem is marked for iso-8859-1, what should a kernel with a >> conversion mechanism do if a user tries to name a file 김? > > Return -ENOENT? I am guessing.
Doesn't seem very friendly.
> But please tell me what should do userland software if it runs with > locale set to something.iso-8859-2 and finds 김 in the directory?
I suppose it will display ęš (0x80 doesn't seem be a printable iso-8859-2 character). You told it to use iso-8859-2 in the first place, so what do you expect?
> That is the same problem. And for now ISO 8-bit encodings are far > more popolar and usefull with contemporary tools than UTF-8.
ISO 8-bit encodings are more common with characters they can represent. These are a small minority of all characters commonly used.
> That is why I think suggestion of a layer in the kernel that would > translate filenames form utf-8 stored on the media to e.g. latin2 > used by tools is quite reasonable. Especially when there is more > than one encoding for a particular language (think Russian, > Polish). Even more, with such a facility transition would be much > more greaceful since you could have utf-8 filesystem and then you > can worry about tools other tools. The filesystem is already > populated with UFT-8 names.
How is the kernel to know what to translate to/from?
>>>>I think UDF is a better filesystem for many types of media since it is >>>>able to me more gently to the sectors storing the meta data than VFAT >>>>ever will be. >>>I've tried cd packet writing with UDF and it gives insane overhead of >>>about 20%. What metadata you'd like to store for example on your >>>flashdrive or a floppy disk? >> >> Filename, timestamps, all the usual. > > That's why IMHO FAT is quite enough for this purpose.
FAT has a bad habit of constantly hammering the same sectors over and over. This can wear out cheap flash media in no time at all.
-- Måns Rullgård mru@inprovide.com - 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/
| |