From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11586 invoked by alias); 15 Jun 2011 17:29:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 11498 invoked by uid 22791); 15 Jun 2011 17:29:41 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB,SPF_SOFTFAIL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mtaout23.012.net.il (HELO mtaout23.012.net.il) (80.179.55.175) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 17:29:27 +0000 Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout23.012.net.il by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0LMU00100CTJTU00@a-mtaout23.012.net.il> for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 20:29:23 +0300 (IDT) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.126.164.125]) by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0LMU001C5DWXMU80@a-mtaout23.012.net.il>; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 20:29:23 +0300 (IDT) Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 17:29:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: [RFA/libiberty] Darwin has case-insensitive filesystems In-reply-to: <20110615082236.GP12140@calimero.vinschen.de> To: Corinna Vinschen Cc: dj@redhat.com, pinskia@gmail.com, brobecker@adacore.com, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, gdb-patches@sourceware.org Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii Message-id: <8362o79f9j.fsf@gnu.org> References: <1308087182-26577-1-git-send-email-brobecker@adacore.com> <201106142201.p5EM1vOd006127@greed.delorie.com> <20110615082236.GP12140@calimero.vinschen.de> X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2011-06/txt/msg00222.txt.bz2 > Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 10:22:36 +0200 > From: Corinna Vinschen > Cc: Andrew Pinski , brobecker@adacore.com, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, gdb-patches@sourceware.org > > Talking about case-insensitive comparison, the filename_cmp and > filename_ncmp functions don't work for multibyte codesets, only for > singlebyte codesets. Given that UTF-8 is standard nowadays, shouldn't > these functions be replaced with multibyte-aware versions? I agree, but if we go that way, shouldn't we support UTF-16, which is used by the native Windows APIs? Windows does not use UTF-8 for file names.