On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 14:46:12 -0230 "Jonathan Anderson" <jonathan_at_FreeBSD.org> wrote: > On 12 Sep 2017, at 14:38, Julian Elischer wrote: > > > $B!H"._at_'0lP$".".B?;zIdJ87oL>".EYE*J87oL\E*_at_'L?L>0lP$J87oMQCfJ80?<TF|J80?<T".J8;zIdVu3nMW5a;zId".EYD6".H,==8^P$;zIdA39!9i".".J87oE~2f".E*6&5}J87o".4G4G_at_'H]G=".9i".".J87oE~2f(B.txt$B!I(B > > (I have no idea what that says but apparently it's a real filename > > from a windows machine that blew up when written via samba.) > > Google Translate says, amusingly: > "This is a test file for the length of the file name. The purpose is to > name a file in Chinese or Japanese or Korean characters and require the > character to be longer than 85 characters and then copy the file into > our shared folder to see if it can copy the file To me" (.txt, I guess) > > No matter what number you choose for a path length, you're never going > to win against that specific user. :) Most people who doesn't know the "internals" would not matter how long "a character" is. So we'd better assuming the longest-possible character. At worst, file name string can contain shift-in / shift-out or charset change sequences, and become much longer (character sets specific). But if we decide the "filename standard" as UTF-8, it wouldn't be needed and 4 (6?) bytes/character would be sufficient. So if we decide max length on "UTF-8 characters" to be 256, 1536 "bytes" would be sufficient. *Possibly 5 and 6 bytes character in UTF-8 could be already prohibited. If so, 1024 bytes is sufficient. > > > Jon > -- > Jonathan Anderson > jonathan_at_FreeBSD.org > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current_at_freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe_at_freebsd.org" > > -- Tomoaki AOKI <junchoon_at_dec.sakura.ne.jp>Received on Sat Sep 16 2017 - 02:07:55 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:41:13 UTC