Roland Kuhn wrote:
>
> No, we don't. At least not when looking at the POSIX spec, which
> explicitly mentions _bytes_ and _not_ unicode characters. So, to be on
> the safe side, FAT filesystems would need to support a NAME_MAX of
> roughly 6*255+3=1533 bytes (not to mention the hassles of forbidden
> sequences, etc.; do we need to count zero-width characters?) and report
> it through pathconf() to userspace, then userspace could do with that
> whatever it liked.
>
> What happened to: "file names are just sequences of octets, excluding
> '/' and NUL"? Adding unicode parsing to the kernel is completely useless
> _and_ a big trouble maker.
>
"Filenames are just octets" have never applied to alien filesystems like
VFAT.
-hpa
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
