Samba

NAVIGATION
CATEGORIES
REFERRENCE
LINKS
  • iocharset iso8859-1 vs cp1252

    2 answers - 816 bytes - related search similar search Add To My Delicious Add To My Stumble Upon Add To My Google Mark Add To My Facebook Add To My Digg Add To My Reddit

    It is my understanding that although very similar, there are subtle
    differences ( )
    between iso8859-1 and Windows-1252, especially in the area of the C1
    Control Code set ( and
    ).
    I have a file on a Windows 2003 server which I believe is using the 0x0096
    EN-DASH character in the filename, and I am finding this file impossible to
    read from a linux box using mount -t cifs -o iocharset=iso8859-1. I don't
    seem to be able to assign iocharset=cp1252 which is what I want. It appears
    to me that a cp1252 doesn't even exist (
    ). Is there some reason for
    this? Am I completely mistaken in all of this, and there is really some
    other silly reason I cannot read the file?
    linux-cifs-client mailing list
    linux-cifs-client (AT) lists (DOT) samba.org
  • No.1 | | 885 bytes | |

    Mon, 2006-10-16 at 16:56 -0500, bugzilla KevinH wrote:
    It is my understanding that although very similar, there are subtle
    differences
    ( )
    between iso8859-1 and Windows-1252, especially in the area of the C1
    Control Code set
    ( and
    ).

    I have a file on a Windows 2003 server which I believe is using the
    0x0096 EN-DASH character in the filename, and I am finding this file
    impossible to read from a linux box using mount -t cifs -o
    iocharset=iso8859-1. I don't seem to be able to assign
    iocharset=cp1252 which is what I want. It appears to me that a cp1252
    doesn't even exist ( ).
    Is there some reason for this? Am I completely mistaken in all of
    this, and there is really some other silly reason I cannot read the
    file?

    Why don't you just use utf8 ?
    Windows uses utf16 so utf8 is the best match.

    Simo.
  • No.2 | | 1727 bytes | |

    10/16/06, simo <idra (AT) samba (DOT) orgwrote:
    Mon, 2006-10-16 at 16:56 -0500, bugzilla KevinH wrote:
    It is my understanding that although very similar, there are subtle
    differences
    ( )
    between iso8859-1 and Windows-1252, especially in the area of the C1
    Control Code set
    ( and
    ).

    I have a file on a Windows 2003 server which I believe is using the
    0x0096 EN-DASH character in the filename, and I am finding this file
    impossible to read from a linux box using mount -t cifs -o
    iocharset=iso8859-1. I don't seem to be able to assign
    iocharset=cp1252 which is what I want. It appears to me that a cp1252
    doesn't even exist ( ).
    Is there some reason for this? Am I completely mistaken in all of
    this, and there is really some other silly reason I cannot read the
    file?

    Why don't you just use utf8 ?
    Windows uses utf16 so utf8 is the best match.

    Well, I had a reason, but it turns out it wasn't a very good one.

    The reason I wasn't using utf8 was because I was reading a file
    generated by a program which I have no control over, which contained a
    list of files on the windows server for me to copy. That file is in
    CP1252.

    But you are absolutely right, rather than depending on the filesystem
    drivers to handle the conversion for me, I can just as easily convert
    the CP1252 strings I read out of the file to UTF8.

    I still think there is a gap in coverage of iocharsetsbut my
    problem is fixed, so I have no good reason to ask for a CP1252
    iocharset anymore.

    Thanks Simo.
    -Kevin

    linux-cifs-client mailing list
    linux-cifs-client (AT) lists (DOT) samba.org

Re: iocharset iso8859-1 vs cp1252


max 4000 letters.
Your nickname that display:
In order to stop the spam: 0 + 0 =
QUESTION ON "Samba"

EMSDN.COM