Re: vfat filesystem: Why utf8=1 when iocharset=”utf8” was already there?

[NamJae Jeon <linkinjeon@gmail.com>]

2011/9/2 Amit Sahrawat <amit.sahrawat83@gmail.com>:
> From my opinion both should support the same functionality as the
> motive behind this seems to introduce the complete support for utf8.
> But, I am surprised to see the behavior changes in the ‘2’ options.
> 1)      When using iocharset=”utf8” it makes vfat case sensitive, while
> this is not the case with using utf8=1
> 2)      Surrogate pair don’t work when using iocharset=”utf8”, because that
> traverses a path like this:
> xlate_to_uni()-->nls->char2uni()-->char2uni()-->utf8_to_utf32()
> After this it returns EINVAL because Surrogate pair correct code is
> greater than 0xFFFF (MAX_WCHAR_T – limit which is put)
> But this is not the case with utf8=1
> There are other places also where I can see usage different due to
> usage of char2uni()
>
> Can someone provide any help on this? Why do we have separate options
> for using utf8 and if utf8=1 smoothly supports proper working then why
> not discard iocharset=”utf8” ? and if this is not the case
> why was utf8=1 introduced?
>
> Please provide any guidance in this.
>
> Thanks & Regards,
> Amit Sahrawat
>

I also am wondering this issue for long time.
May be, Ogawa will know well.