From: "Christopher R. Hertel" <crh@NTS.Umn.EDU> Message-Id: <199803312220.QAA10919@unet.unet.umn.edu> Subject: Re: Mangle again. To: jallison@whistle.com (Jeremy Allison) Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 16:20:23 -0600 (CST) In-Reply-To: <35216880.62319AC4@whistle.com> from "Jeremy Allison" at Mar 31, 98 02:04:48 pm
That's why I asked.
Chris -)-----
> Nope - I think it's correct as is. The decision
> to mangle can be made if the filename would be
> impossible to see under DOS/Windows - in this case
> the mangling is to change these filenames into
> something Windows can use. Remember, these
> 'illegal' characters can be valid in a
> pathname sent *from* the client (wildcards
> etc), just not in a pathname sent back.
>
> The isdoschar has a different use, within the
> is_8_3 function, to determine if a name is
> a valid 8.3 to send back to the client.
>
> The multibyte codepage stuff is not affected
> by this code (check out the skip_multibyte_char)
> call in mangle_name_83().
>
> Jeremy.
-- Christopher R. Hertel -)----- University of Minnesota crh@nts.umn.edu Networking and Telecommunications Services