From: Chris C. <m2c...@gm...> - 2005-11-25 05:52:26
|
I think it is very neccessary to support non-UTF8 filename encoding in ROX. UTF8 is not fullly compatible with some non-english locale. I am using zh_CN locale, and I know most chinese linuxer will not choose UTF8 as their encoding. GTK2 have support environment variable G_FILENAME_ENCODING to deal with the encoding compatible problems. Rox should follow this fashion too! |
From: F. <pe...@fo...> - 2005-11-25 14:33:20
|
Chris Chou <m2c...@gm...> wrote: > I think it is very neccessary to support non-UTF8 filename encoding in > ROX. UTF8 is not fullly compatible with some non-english locale. I am > using zh_CN locale, and I know most chinese linuxer will not choose UTF8 > as their encoding. GTK2 have support environment variable > G_FILENAME_ENCODING to deal with the encoding compatible problems. Rox > should follow this fashion too! Just out of curiosity, what problems do chinese users have with UTF-8? UTF-8 is supposed to solve encoding problems, not introduce more. -- Pelle |
From: Chris C. <m2c...@gm...> - 2005-11-26 14:20:58
|
Pär Forsling wrote: > Chris Chou <m2c...@gm...> wrote: > >>I think it is very neccessary to support non-UTF8 filename encoding in >>ROX. UTF8 is not fullly compatible with some non-english locale. I am >>using zh_CN locale, and I know most chinese linuxer will not choose UTF8 >>as their encoding. GTK2 have support environment variable >>G_FILENAME_ENCODING to deal with the encoding compatible problems. Rox >>should follow this fashion too! > > > Just out of curiosity, what problems do chinese users have with UTF-8? > UTF-8 is supposed to solve encoding problems, not introduce more. UTF-8 is not compatible with the national standard gb18030、gbk and gb2312. Most of the applications of chinese do not work properly in UTF-8, because they are designed only for gb starndards. I think it is no technical difficulties to add non-UTF8 support to Rox, why not let it become more compatible and flexible? |
From: Lucas H. <lu...@di...> - 2005-11-26 15:40:56
|
On Sat, 26 Nov 2005 22:20:58 +0800 Chris Chou <m2c...@gm...> wrote: > Pär Forsling wrote: > > Chris Chou <m2c...@gm...> wrote: > > > >>I think it is very neccessary to support non-UTF8 filename encoding in > >>ROX. UTF8 is not fullly compatible with some non-english locale. I am > >>using zh_CN locale, and I know most chinese linuxer will not choose UTF8 > >>as their encoding. GTK2 have support environment variable > >>G_FILENAME_ENCODING to deal with the encoding compatible problems. Rox > >>should follow this fashion too! > > > > > > Just out of curiosity, what problems do chinese users have with UTF-8? > > UTF-8 is supposed to solve encoding problems, not introduce more. > > UTF-8 is not compatible with the national standard gb18030、gbk and > gb2312. Most of the applications of chinese do not work properly in > UTF-8, because they are designed only for gb starndards. > > I think it is no technical difficulties to add non-UTF8 support to Rox, > why not let it become more compatible and flexible? > My experience is that ROX that will use whatever encoding the shell environment is using. This statement is based purely on assumption as at one stage when I was migrating to UTF-8 a lot of files that had latin characters would be displayed as with red text, which simply required renaming the file using the correct encoding. Swtiching back to ISO-8859-1 would result in the filenames being red again. To do use UTF-8 by default in X I just add the following line to .xsession. LC_ALL=en_AU.UTF-8 I hope this is of some use to your problem. -- Lucas Hazel <lu...@di...> ================================================= "Clothes make the man. Naked men are rarely taken seriously, or given employment." (Mark Twain) ================================================= |
From: Vincent L. <vi...@vi...> - 2005-11-26 17:10:33
|
On 2005-11-27 02:41:06 +1100, Lucas Hazel wrote: > My experience is that ROX that will use whatever encoding the shell > environment is using. Fortunately, no. This would be a bug. Do not mix up filename encoding, that must be something global to the system, and shell environment that is local to the shell. The shells do not support non-ASCII encodings in a consistent way. So, do not use non-ASCII characters there, unless you are the only user of the machine, you are using the same encoding everywhere and you only use applications that will do the necessary conversions of remote filenames. In practice, UTF-8 is the non-ASCII encoding that will give the most compatibility for filenames. -- Vincent Lefèvre <vi...@vi...> - Web: <http://www.vinc17.org/> 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <http://www.vinc17.org/blog/> Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / SPACES project at LORIA |
From: Chris C. <m2c...@gm...> - 2005-11-27 02:30:29
|
Vincent Lefevre wrote: > On 2005-11-27 02:41:06 +1100, Lucas Hazel wrote: > >>My experience is that ROX that will use whatever encoding the shell >>environment is using. > > > Fortunately, no. This would be a bug. Do not mix up filename encoding, > that must be something global to the system, and shell environment that > is local to the shell. > > The shells do not support non-ASCII encodings in a consistent way. > So, do not use non-ASCII characters there, unless you are the only > user of the machine, you are using the same encoding everywhere and > you only use applications that will do the necessary conversions of > remote filenames. In practice, UTF-8 is the non-ASCII encoding that > will give the most compatibility for filenames. > I agree with Vincent lefevre. Althought UTF-8 is a good things, we can not ensure it will be used in everywhere, supported by every application. There is no a integrated interface to deal with this problem in *nix. Any environment settings are just a recommendation to applications, not enforced. To keep using single encoding in filenames is neccessary, and compatible filename encoding solutions for applications are important. |