Re: console translator set without encoding

2005-01-23 Thread Danilo Segan
Today at 15:19, Marco Gerards wrote: >> Filenames are 8-bit ASCII compatible strings (UTF-FS as in >> "filesystem-safe" originally), and that's all you need to know to make >> POSIX-compliant programs. In recent discussions on [EMAIL PROTECTED], someone mentioned that only "/" is forbidden in POS

Re: console translator set without encoding

2005-01-23 Thread Marco Gerards
Danilo Segan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > What are you going to do when you come across a filesystem where you > have two files with such names which only differ in normalisation form > used (i.e. fully decomposed or fully composed)? Yeah, you can ensure > that no filesystem created via GNU/Hurd

Re: console translator set without encoding

2005-01-23 Thread Michal 'hramrach' Suchanek
On Sat, Jan 22, 2005 at 03:49:51AM +0100, Marcus Brinkmann wrote: > Hi, > > Ok, so I am not the quickest to respond... > > At Tue, 07 Sep 2004 12:39:06 +0200, > Patrick Strasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > CC-ing bug-hurd > > Ognyan Kulev wrote: > > > Patrick Strasser wrote: > > > > > >> Unic

Re: console translator set without encoding

2005-01-23 Thread Danilo Segan
Hi Samuel, Today at 14:04, Samuel Thibault wrote: > Normalized form take care of glyphs that really can be coded several > different ways: for instance, latin e with acute accent may be directly > coded as 'ÃÂ', but in unicode, may also be coded as 'e' followed by the > combining acute accent. Th

Re: console translator set without encoding

2005-01-23 Thread Samuel Thibault
Danilo Segan, le dim 23 jan 2005 01:44:25 +0100, a dit : > Using normalized forms would then simply be up to the writer and > reader, just as it is up to the writer and reader today to check for > all of "Music", "music", "mUSIC" and similar when a user actually > searches for his music directory.

Re: console translator set without encoding

2005-01-22 Thread Danilo Segan
Hi Marcus, Yesterday at 5:56, Marcus Brinkmann wrote: > At 21 Jan 2005 19:31:13 -0800, > Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: >> >> Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >> > UTF-8 is an insanely complex standard, if you start to look down its >> > depths. >> >> UTF-8 is a complex standard.

Re: console translator set without encoding

2005-01-22 Thread Alfred M. Szmidt
If I were to build a GNU system, I would make UTF-8 the default, but then I would also make all sure all applications use that out of the box (actually, is emacs ready for that? I am unsure). For what it is worth, GNU will use UTF-8 by default. As for Emacs, I don't think so, there is a

Re: console translator set without encoding

2005-01-21 Thread Thomas Bushnell BSG
Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Oh, sure. The insanity starts if you talk about using "UTF-8" for > things like filenames without being very exact in what you mean by > that. The implications of putting the complex system UTF-8 into a > POSIX-like operating systems as they exist t

Re: console translator set without encoding

2005-01-21 Thread Marcus Brinkmann
At 21 Jan 2005 19:31:13 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > > Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > UTF-8 is an insanely complex standard, if you start to look down its > > depths. > > UTF-8 is a complex standard. It is not insanely so. It is complex > because it is representing

Re: console translator set without encoding

2005-01-21 Thread Marcus Brinkmann
At 21 Jan 2005 18:58:41 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > > Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Irregardless of what you think about it - the > > western world doesn't need it (where ISO 8859-1 or 15 is enough). > > If only this were true. Obviously I was exaggerating. > You a

Re: console translator set without encoding

2005-01-21 Thread Thomas Bushnell BSG
Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > UTF-8 is an insanely complex standard, if you start to look down its > depths. UTF-8 is a complex standard. It is not insanely so. It is complex because it is representing a very complex problem. It is a standard computer programmer's disease

Re: console translator set without encoding

2005-01-21 Thread Thomas Bushnell BSG
Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Irregardless of what you think about it - the > western world doesn't need it (where ISO 8859-1 or 15 is enough). If only this were true. There is no encoding which will include all of the Latin character sets I want. This occurs for me in tagging

Re: console translator set without encoding

2005-01-21 Thread Marcus Brinkmann
Hi, Ok, so I am not the quickest to respond... At Tue, 07 Sep 2004 12:39:06 +0200, Patrick Strasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > CC-ing bug-hurd > Ognyan Kulev wrote: > > Patrick Strasser wrote: > > > >> Unicode did not work until i set it to > >> /hurd/console --encoding=UTF-8 > >> via > >> set

Re: console translator set without encoding

2004-09-07 Thread Ognyan Kulev
Patrick Strasser wrote: I'm not shure if this is a Debian issue. Why should Debian have a different default encoding? Yes, such change should affect upstream behaviour too. I hope this to go in the next hurd upload, which is eagerly expected by many of us. Regards, ogi _

Re: console translator set without encoding

2004-09-07 Thread Patrick Strasser
CC-ing bug-hurd Ognyan Kulev wrote: Patrick Strasser wrote: Unicode did not work until i set it to /hurd/console --encoding=UTF-8 via settrans /dev/vcs /hurd/console --encoding=UTF-8 I think this should be the default. The change will be in MAKEDEV. Will you submit bug for the hurd package? Then