Re: [GIT PULL] UDF support for UTF-16

[Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>]

On Thu 07-06-18 10:15:57, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 9:59 AM Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> wrote:
> >
> > Yeah, it's a totally broken format, but we shouldn't be thinking that
> > filenames which come to us in UTF16 are actually in UCS2.
> 
> Ok, old fixed-2-byte UCS2 is certainly even worse than UTF16, so no
> argument on that side.
> 
> I was more wondering who actually *does* this, but it sounds like it
> was a mostly just that we used to do the old-style UCS-2, and this is
> extending it to the slightly less broken "extended UCS-2" aka UTF-16.
> 
> I'd just have liked to see some more background in the logs, because
> this seemed to me such an odd change to do that it made me go "why
> would anybody ever care?".
> 
> But I guess MS (and maybe even OSX) _)still_ haven't gotten the memo
> on utf-8 and actually use UTF-16..
> 
> Oh well.

Yes, Windows still apparently use UTF-16 (at least according to a user
report I've got which motivated this work) and the OSTA UDF standard
defines that filenames in UDF are in "OSTA Compressed Unicode" which may be
actually UTF-16 if the program creating the filesystem image chooses so.

I agree that the changelogs should have mentioned this. My bad.

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>
SUSE Labs, CR