Re: Bug#99933: second attempt at more comprehensive unicode policy
On Mon, 6 Jan 2003, Sebastian Rittau wrote:
> > I think you'd need to have all of argv be converted to utf-8 by the shell.
>
> This wouldn't work, since you're not able to handle files that are not
> in UTF-8 encoding, then. This is especially bothersome if you have some
> old non-UTF-8 files lying around.
Well, I think there are lots of ways to deal with this, if ls does
character conversion on output then you can cut and paste the mangled
filename, or tab completion can help produce a mangled name that converts
to utf-8 properly, even a GUI program can be used.
I hope everyone will agree that having a coding other than unicode in the
filesystem is completely unworkable, so we have to view such things as
'need to be converted' not 'need to keep working forever'.
Yes, it means there will be a period when filenames that are not in
unicode are more troublesome to deal with until they are converted, but I
really don't see an alternative :< Even right now we should start to see
problems with unicode enabled kde/gnome apps assuming utf-8 filenames!
Jason
Reply to: