Re: CONFIG_VFAT_FS_DUALNAMES regressions

[OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>]

tridge@samba.org writes:

> I should also mention that in the first patch I sent back in May, I
> added some code that made the 8.3 name problem easier on the user. It
> basically forced the shortname= option, overriding the mount option,
> when the patch was triggered. The end result was that a name like
> dcis3000.jpg would always be stored as a 8.3 name, and thus be visible
> to digital cameras, even if the mount options were set to say that
> lowercase names should be considered as "long" names.
>
> Hirofumi objected, on the basis that I was overriding the VFAT
> mount option. I think that overriding in this case would in fact be
> worthwhile, as I don't think many users ever think carefully about
> what shortname= option they are using, and unless you get it right
> then you can get some real surprises.
>
> Hirofumi-san, do you think that same objection you expressed
> previously also applies to this new patch? For example, would you
> think it reasonable to modify the patch to store the filename as 8.3
> if it can fit in 8.3 in a case mapped manner? Or store as 8.3 if it is
> all uppercase or all lowercase?

I have no objection to improve. And in this case, for this option, to
force the shortname= sounds reasonable.

Thanks.

> I think we will hit cases like the one Jan has pointed out where the
> exising shortname= options will become even more confusing than they
> were already when this new patch is applied, especially as I think
> most distros these days magically supply a shortname= option when you
> insert some VFAT formatted media.
-- 
OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>