Liste des Groupes | Revenir à cl c |
Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> writes:Am 28.04.2025 um 16:24 schrieb Scott Lurndal:Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> writes:>Am 28.04.2025 um 11:39 schrieb Bonita Montero:
Am 28.04.2025 um 11:31 schrieb Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org:Yes, Unix-APIs are really achaic. When you have a filename>
written with ohne user's locale and another with a different
locale reads that he get's at most a partitially readable
filename. For Janis this seems to be flexibility, but for me
that's a problem. A file- system should have fixed charset, at
best Unicode.
I did have a look at how macOS / APFS handles this:
for macOS all filenames are UTF-8.
No, unix (and macOS _is_ unix) filenames are a simple stream of
bytes with no meaning or semantic associated with the bytes other
than the terminating nul character and the directory separator
character.
The Wikipedia says that APFS is UTF-8 capable.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_File_System
So is linux. The operating system ascribes no meaning to the bytes
stored in the filesystem directories. They're just a stream of
bytes.
One can treat them as UTF-8, which is generally the case. In which
case your objections about 'garbage' in a different locale are
pointless. UTF-8 fonts are universal. The currently locale doesn't
matter.
Windows, on the other hand, limits the character set to those that can
be described in 16-bit units, and the "locale" matters for not only
display purposes, but also for character processing.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.