On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 05:27:51PM +0530, Shreeya Patel wrote: > On 26/04/21 6:04 am, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 04:01:05AM +0530, Shreeya Patel wrote: > > > exFAT filesystem does not support the following character codes > > > 0x0000 - 0x001F ( Control Codes ), /, ?, :, ", \, *, <, |, > > > ummm ... > > > > > -# Fake slash? > > > -setf "urk\xc0\xafmoo" "FAKESLASH" > > That doesn't use any of the explained banned characters. It uses 0xc0, > > 0xaf. > > > > Now, in utf-8, that's an nonconforming sequence. "The Unicode and UCS > > standards require that producers of UTF-8 shall use the shortest form > > possible, for example, producing a two-byte sequence with first byte 0xc0 > > is nonconforming. Unicode 3.1 has added the requirement that conforming > > programs must not accept non-shortest forms in their input." > > > > So is it that exfat is rejecting nonconforming sequences? Or is it > > converting the nonconforming sequence from 0xc0 0xaf to the conforming > > sequence 0x2f, and then rejecting it (because it's '/')? > > > > No, I don't think exfat is not converting nonconforming sequence from 0xc0 > 0xaf > to the conforming sequence 0x2f. > Because I get different outputs when tried with both ways. > When I create a file with "urk\xc0\xafmoo", I get output as "Operation not > permitted" > and when I create it as "urk\x2fmoo", it gives "No such file or directory > error" or > you can consider this error as "Invalid argument" > ( because that's what I get when I try for other characters like |, :, ?, > etc ) I think we need to understand this before skipping the test. Does it also fail, eg, on cifs, vfat, jfs or udf? > Box filename also fails with "Invalid argument" error. > >
