From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261555AbUBUNy6 (ORCPT ); Sat, 21 Feb 2004 08:54:58 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261556AbUBUNy6 (ORCPT ); Sat, 21 Feb 2004 08:54:58 -0500 Received: from gprs154-206.eurotel.cz ([160.218.154.206]:40320 "EHLO amd.ucw.cz") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261555AbUBUNy5 (ORCPT ); Sat, 21 Feb 2004 08:54:57 -0500 Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 14:54:39 +0100 From: Pavel Machek To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Marc , Jamie Lokier , Marc Lehmann , viro@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk, Linux kernel Subject: Re: UTF-8 practically vs. theoretically in the VFS API (was: Re: JFS default behavior) Message-ID: <20040221135439.GA310@elf.ucw.cz> References: <200402150107.26277.robin.rosenberg.lists@dewire.com> <20040216183616.GA16491@schmorp.de> <20040216200321.GB17015@schmorp.de> <20040216222618.GF18853@mail.shareable.org> <20040217071448.GA8846@schmorp.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Warning: Reading this can be dangerous to your mental health. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi! > Which flies in the face of "Be strict in what you generate, be liberal in > what you accept". A lot of the functions are _not_ willing to be liberal > in what they accept. Which sometimes just makes the problem worse, for no > good reason. Be liberal in what you accept used to be good rule... until security became important. While it is still nice from ease-of-use viewpoint, its bad when you want it secure. Pavel -- When do you have a heart between your knees? [Johanka's followup: and *two* hearts?]