This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-developers
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: codepage:utf8... do we still need it?
- From: Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin at cygwin dot com>
- To: cygwin-developers at cygwin dot com
- Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 10:30:11 +0100
- Subject: Re: codepage:utf8... do we still need it?
- References: <1237306539.24446.ezmlm@cygwin.com> <49C082CD.2050804@cwilson.fastmail.fm>
- Reply-to: cygwin-developers at cygwin dot com
On Mar 18 01:12, Charles Wilson wrote:
> Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > Does anybody have an idea if we could get rid of codepage:ansi/oem
> > entirely? Do we need it at all? I'm not quite sure what the OEM
> > codepage is still good for. I'm wondering if using the ANSI code page
> > in case __locale_charset () isn't UTF-8 should be sufficient, now that
> > all file and console operations are using wide char functions anyway.
> > But that's the problem, I'm not at all sure I understand that right.
>
> The only thing I can think of, is that you used to have to set
> codepage:oem in order to get linedraw characters in ncurses-based
> applications, when running in a cmd box.
>
> I just tried it in all six modes:
> codepage:ansi
> codepage:oem x cygwin-1.5
> <nothing> cygwin-1.7
>
> and I got the box characters in every case. So, THAT isn't a reason to
> keep codepage: around.
Ok, good to know. I'm still somewhat puzzled as far as native charsets
are concerned. AFAIR Igor mentioned that one has to use codepage:oem to
use cyrillic characters with Cygwin running in a Windows console or
something like that. I'm just wondering if we can ignore this problem
now and just ask people to set $LANG or $LC_ALL to, say, ru_RU.UTF-8
and use UTF-8 instead.
Corinna
--
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat