From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mout.kundenserver.de (mout.kundenserver.de [212.227.126.135]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 03D7D3857838 for ; Tue, 13 Oct 2020 11:44:55 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 03D7D3857838 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=cygwin.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=corinna-cygwin@cygwin.com Received: from calimero.vinschen.de ([24.134.7.25]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (mreue009 [212.227.15.167]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MhlCa-1jxLhG2cCW-00dpTV for ; Tue, 13 Oct 2020 13:44:54 +0200 Received: by calimero.vinschen.de (Postfix, from userid 500) id 1D838A82BCF; Tue, 13 Oct 2020 13:44:54 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2020 13:44:54 +0200 From: Corinna Vinschen To: cygwin-patches@cygwin.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] Cygwin: pty: Add workaround for ISO-2022 and ISCII in convert_mb_str(). Message-ID: <20201013114454.GI26704@calimero.vinschen.de> Reply-To: cygwin-patches@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-patches@cygwin.com References: <20200911105401.153-1-takashi.yano@nifty.ne.jp> <20200911120840.GH4127@calimero.vinschen.de> <20200911213515.98a88ca7f186ede9bf8fc106@nifty.ne.jp> <20200911140601.GK4127@calimero.vinschen.de> <20200912010504.586a156f1712f61c3c696d40@nifty.ne.jp> <20200912023843.58ef0f3134d6aea5359c27c0@nifty.ne.jp> <20200912033758.d3e898332cb37f8b69f43bd4@nifty.ne.jp> <20200911185706.GO4127@calimero.vinschen.de> <20200912041116.71e276467eaa4040c329547d@nifty.ne.jp> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200912041116.71e276467eaa4040c329547d@nifty.ne.jp> X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:bE25Px3NoK/8o1etTR5mCmjAUnNDJBDzM4+0KoUo7wtMEhZbDlS ANKILg4fRbAqTTDVkejn1VICWpoO1leytU7ZBtfetnxvuD9LMRNDGFNO47ljXGSRJUcGzig Cq+l77O9N4JE/wCYcN+BUUSnZYbzg2TqisC8SLi0IlbCIaHspC1LfeyPeQYxTOnpE3asQ3D iSomAtn3EzvO1wATbxTCA== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:BoxN5pQctZY=:UMFnSDJa7Gvs1a6MCBZ32m 5vXrteImkkb3PKNJAorbDu0E8yXUIk4XW9VP1Az0gFVQjthivjG49utscbflnHnrihOvxXIAO C4yv8nqC+c63YLaTQNm6tB5yBQ9WcVfuldsc5D4n4bNJlJtBUszswizd3uyJeiNRFkEqaa5T5 qiqt1v9pB/EPiZAijnoR6rUBfmVfROJPrZaUmCgtxLS26KqmLuX3PaHYi5iyJlbUBWAaok/eF hc5jAEwAnQJIygODeAJsu1JyF/SVdNz/1S4dklSaWHTrWsBLlyzTVXo9shA5XhknkGmL/wYSR AXtoia0zp5vAPdjYsGrA2qqtMjKEjfiu3DKILSvlel69QvZWSxu/NJrMnGlPMeaAz+Vpc8P9Z 1Sc074G6wHvzaGA0e+dRqsNjELXYrRdXB2OF2n6xyEyXM9WFkaJLAKo8Tx79792DyBfr7HdjR rBN2dokRWmGdrHmFubqOJ5gYEftkAIjWn9Ubm35znghigDJKZOwTOR3VR5eYe9hVCS3irW2wV i6loPGFUzdzqYpp6iKEemxYCWDrEI4OsgrV91XMEEdmLRRk3UGR6XG69wvcHXTMqRFwyvXidA QkvR/J70zyJqA9VAoGUxypakZRLPThGvDgDVhJhwAoTW9+ui4HxJxGCRKfq1ygiO6vydavK1O +gyKjO+CurGYUbn4t+zgy44Jk+/Rfngmp28pDMWjqNX3x9dcroQya88VITVzlhPCQo09hgf23 S0UemXR9jrTdz1NPyo7xQ7ifAkqrrjmInzPVoBOndWEIgkqCSMkRlrbFH4yizgHW3/jtmmSo6 Kj9n3uzoBS3MraJezdHnLEBSma6UDCSnAdPASfLef2yq9ldjseKu8YhvYnIRgSRfcPVi2ndZu Hkn8FVpmlPKx880yveOymuoE0GJOrc5oWTjYIjpjs= X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, GOOD_FROM_CORINNA_CYGWIN, JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_NEUTRAL, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: cygwin-patches@cygwin.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Cygwin core component patch submission and discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2020 11:44:57 -0000 On Sep 12 04:11, Takashi Yano via Cygwin-patches wrote: > On Fri, 11 Sep 2020 20:57:06 +0200 > Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > On Sep 12 03:37, Takashi Yano via Cygwin-patches wrote: > > > On Sat, 12 Sep 2020 02:38:43 +0900 > > > Takashi Yano via Cygwin-patches wrote: > > > > How about the patch attached? > > > > I think this is safer than previous patch. > > > > > > I have revised this patch to fit current git head, and submit > > > to cygwin-patches@cygwin.com. > > > > Thanks, but I didn't apply this one because it doesn't really make sense > > to go to the extra effort to support outdated and incompatible codepages > > we don't handle as Cygwin codeset at all. IMHO it's not worth to call > > another MBTWC just to check if a codepage supports the MB_ERR_INVALID_CHARS > > flag. > > I have checked which codepage does not support MB_ERR_INVALID_CHARS. > The result is as follows. > > 42 > 50220 > 50221 > 50222 > 50225 > 50227 > 50229 > 52936 > 57002 > 57003 > 57004 > 57005 > 57006 > 57007 > 57008 > 57009 > 57010 > 57011 > 65000 Yup, these are documented on MSDN: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/stringapiset/nf-stringapiset-widechartomultibyte > If all of these are not worth for everyone, I agree with you. I think we can skip those. Corinna