Hi,
On Mon, 30 May 2005, Pavel Fedin wrote:
> Codepage option is called "hfscodepage", not "codepage" because in
> future "codepage" option might be added to iso9660 filesystem in order
> to enable translation of 8-bit names and in many countries ISO codepage
> differs from HFS codepage.
If the codepage differs, you simply use different arguments for that
option. Is there a _technical_ reason why "hfscodepage" and "codepage"
might behave differently? Otherwise I'd prefer to use the same name for
the option.
Why do you build the extra translation tables? I'm not relly convinced
this is a kernel problem at all, but doing it more like fat would be more
acceptable (maybe just with some more sane defaults).
(BTW please try to inline the patch otherwise it's rather difficult to
quote from it.)
> + if (hsb->nls)
> + {
Please fix the coding style.
> +extern void hfs_triv2mac(struct hfs_name *, struct qstr *, unsigned char *, struct nls_table *);
If you add a new argument, use "struct superblock *sb" as the first
argument.
bye, Roman
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
