Colin Walters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> I think that this would be a really bad idea, because it would be a to >> severe restriction on the set of supported terminal types. Think of >> remote logins from non-Debian machines: we cannot control the program >> at the other end of the line. And what about serial (hardware) VT-220 >> terminals? We cannot change the hardware and to loose support for it >> would be not nice. > > That's true, but I don't think there is really anything we can do to > solve that problem.
Then your solution is broken. Seriously, this would be a huge problem for many people. >> So in my opinion we cannot drop support for non-UTF8 locales and >> terminals. We need to do file-name conversion here. > > Well, such terminals should be explicitly marked as deprecated inside > Debian. Actually, probably the best solution is for the terminal to be > able to switch encodings at runtime; the experimental gnome-terminal can > do this. You can't very well take an actual vt100 and do that. Even on other hardware, like older Suns, it's not all that easy. I am vehemently opposed to any proposal that renders Debian substantially unusable on existing ASCII/latin1 terminals. I think it is great to use Unicode internally, but we clearly are not pursuing the right path if we introduce such breakage. (Yes, this would mean that TERM=vt100 is now deprecated)
