On Wed, 2007-03-14 at 02:07 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote: > On Tue, 2007-03-13 at 22:57 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > > > > The tools that we're building (package database, koji, etc) currently > > assume that we'll only encounter UTF-8 filenames. We've found at least > > one package (aspell-is) which currently has a non-UTF-8 filename so we > > want to decide if these cases should be considered packaging bugs or if > > we need to build some sort of support for this into our tools. Does > > this need to be a packaging guideline? Perhaps not but where else does > > it fit? We could tuck it in as one of the things rpmlint reports and > > not list it explicitly but it is something that we are going to always > > want fixed (whereas we allow people to dispute many of the other errors > > and warnings reported by rpmlint.) > > > > While in practise 99.9% of all filenames will be UTF-8 or even ASCII, > it seems misguided to let tools make assumptions about that. The only > assumption that can be safely made is that '/' and '\0' don't occur > inside the byte sequence that makes up a filename... The thing is we control the filenames to some extent. If we decide that every filename in one of our packages has to be utf-8 then we'll never have a filename enter the database that isn't utf-8. If we decide that it's okay for fedora packages to contain files whose names are not encoded in utf-8 then the tools will have to cope with it. -Toshio
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- Fedora-maintainers mailing list Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers
-- Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
