From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S265201AbUBRMbt (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Feb 2004 07:31:49 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266369AbUBRMbt (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Feb 2004 07:31:49 -0500 Received: from [212.28.208.94] ([212.28.208.94]:37135 "HELO dewire.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S265201AbUBRMbr (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Feb 2004 07:31:47 -0500 From: Robin Rosenberg To: tridge@samba.org Subject: Re: UTF-8 and case-insensitivity Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 13:31:36 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.6.1 Cc: hpa@zytor.com, Kernel Mailing List References: <16434.58656.381712.241116@samba.org> <200402181105.58425.robin.rosenberg.lists@dewire.com> <16435.20457.610841.62521@samba.org> In-Reply-To: <16435.20457.610841.62521@samba.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200402181331.36859.robin.rosenberg.lists@dewire.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wednesday 18 February 2004 12.43, tridge@samba.org wrote: > Robin, > > I've read it also: > > http://www.microsoft.com/globaldev/getwr/steps/wrg_unicode.mspx > > "The fundamental representation of text in Windows NT-based > > operating systems is UTF-16" I believe (please correct me if this is wrong) that Windows never actually supported any of the UCS-2 code that were in conflict with UTF-16. The cost of this operation was that some of the "private" code blocks of unicode 2.0, i.e. U+D800..U+DFFF were redefined as "surrogates" in Unicode 3.0 making the UTF-16 encoding more or less backwards compatible with UCS-2. And it's UTF-16LE and UCS-2LE, but I suspect you knew that :-) > yep, in this thread I've been mistakenly using the term UCS-16 when I > should have said UTF-16 (ie. the variable length, 2 byte encoding). > > Samba currently treats the bytes on the wire from windows as UCS-2 (a > 2 byte fixed width encoding), whereas perhaps it should be treating > them as UTF-16. I should write a smbtorture test to detect the > difference and see what different versions of windows actually use. See above, and most importantly the definition in Amendment 1 of the unicode 3.0 standard. > luckily the new charset handling stuff in samba3 and samba4 will make > this easy to fix :-) Happy man! -- robin