Hi,
Right now the kernel detects the sysadmin trying to set the iocharset of
vfat to UTF8 and prevents this with an error. While I can see that this is
not recommended, enforcing this is policy that probably doesn't belong in
the kernel. The patch below makes this situation a warning and a
recommendation instead of a strong blockage.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=126641
is an example of a sysadmin disliking this policy enforcement.
Greetings,
Arjan van de Ven
--- linux-2.6.7/fs/fat/inode.c~ 2004-06-24 11:20:43.941750760 +0200
+++ linux-2.6.7/fs/fat/inode.c 2004-06-24 11:20:43.943750521 +0200
@@ -499,9 +499,8 @@
}
/* UTF8 doesn't provide FAT semantics */
if (!strcmp(opts->iocharset, "utf8")) {
- printk(KERN_ERR "FAT: utf8 is not a valid IO charset"
- " for FAT filesystems\n");
- return -EINVAL;
+ printk(KERN_ERR "FAT: utf8 is not a recommended IO charset"
+ " for FAT filesystems, filesystem will be case sensitive!\n");
}
if (opts->unicode_xlate)
Arjan van de Ven <[email protected]> writes:
> --- linux-2.6.7/fs/fat/inode.c~ 2004-06-24 11:20:43.941750760 +0200
> +++ linux-2.6.7/fs/fat/inode.c 2004-06-24 11:20:43.943750521 +0200
> @@ -499,9 +499,8 @@
> }
> /* UTF8 doesn't provide FAT semantics */
> if (!strcmp(opts->iocharset, "utf8")) {
> - printk(KERN_ERR "FAT: utf8 is not a valid IO charset"
> - " for FAT filesystems\n");
> - return -EINVAL;
> + printk(KERN_ERR "FAT: utf8 is not a recommended IO charset"
> + " for FAT filesystems, filesystem will be case sensitive!\n");
> }
Umm.. why don't use "iocharset=<xxx>,utf8" instead? This is less
unsatisfactory than it option.
Would we still need it? If we still need, I think patch should be applied.
--
OGAWA Hirofumi <[email protected]>