Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Case Insensitive File Systems -- Torvalds Hates Them
Date: Wed, 7 May 2025 14:21:56 +0200
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <4svrelx3dm.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>
References: <pan$4068a$3910f4f1$8cbecede$9e42905e@linux.rocks>
 <20250428111242.00007426@gmail.com>
 <pan$c046d$e87ef491$a3427b7a$ac576dbc@linux.rocks>
 <slrn1011nu8.46v.rotflol2@geidiprime.bvh> <vurjl9$2pskn$1@dont-email.me>
 <slrn1013t50.1aev.rotflol2@geidiprime.bvh>
 <vAGdnR-Fj9qGS4_1nZ2dnZfqn_udnZ2d@giganews.com>
 <slrn1016uic.2qk.rotflol2@geidiprime.bvh> <m7hgt7F8mvgU5@mid.individual.net>
 <6813f997@news.ausics.net> <vvbe5q$1em7m$1@dont-email.me>
 <68194581@news.ausics.net> <vvbook$1oubc$1@dont-email.me>
 <681aa121@news.ausics.net> <wwvcyckspu8.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk>
 <3aorelxelu.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> <vvffgk$vskt$2@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net bZmgbBOw7MWfLbj0ozK54wMvXCu7t7IZ8bSlQyHPut5JI/e1tk
X-Orig-Path: Telcontar.valinor!not-for-mail
Cancel-Lock: sha1:NnajJVw1B0UrGuAZ0+DTj0+up+4= sha256:XWcIHOtR1JBSvbqFZWIqOZihWQZCFcS466TMni8kvvQ=
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: es-ES, en-CA
In-Reply-To: <vvffgk$vskt$2@dont-email.me>

On 2025-05-07 13:17, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 07/05/2025 11:12, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>> On 2025-05-07 12:00, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
>>> not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) writes:
>>>> Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>> It could have been the same with ext* forbidding newlines (also tmpfs
>>>>>> etc.).  Then you'd only have to worry about handling newlines in the
>>>>>> rare case of reading from some non-Linux filesystems like UFS.
>>>>>
>>>>> Could ext* have forbade newlines?  Yes.  But that would have gone
>>>>> against years of Unix tradition at the time had it done so.  Since
>>>>> Linux began as a "clone of Unix" it was only natural for it to inherit
>>>>> Unix traditions as to filenames (any byte value other than ASCII NULL
>>>>> and ASCII forward slash being allowed).
>>>>
>>>> Well the original quote from Torvalds was about case insensitive
>>>> filesystems, which also already have a tradition, but he doesn't
>>>> like them, with good reasons. I feel there are valid reasons to
>>>> dislike newlines in filenames too. Maybe that would have been too
>>>> radical for a UNIX-based OS filesystem, but in practice I can't see
>>>> how it would have caused much trouble, and it would have avoided
>>>> needing lots of special handling for newlines in software.
>>>
>>> Forbidding newlines in extfs and its successors would be straightforward
>>> indeed - no harder than forbidding ‘/’ in filenames. But as well as
>>> swimming against the Unix tide it wouldn’t actually eliminate the
>>> higher-level problem that shell copes badly with filenames with spaces,
>>> newlines, etc, since there’s more to life than Linux’s native
>>> filesystem. Early versions of Linux used the Minix filesystem, and today
>>> the kernel includes a large collection of ‘foreign’ filesystems.
>>>
>>> Using almost any other language than shell, on the other hand, makes the
>>> problem go away.
>>
>> Except if you hardcode a filename inside a C program, for instance. 
>> You still have to escape the quotes.
>>
> That's a different issue: The solution is to construct the name as an 
> octal character array.

LOL! What a solution. Very readable :-D

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.