Mangle again.

[Christopher R. Hertel]

That's why I asked.

Chris -)-----

> Nope - I think it's correct as is. The decision
> to mangle can be made if the filename would be
> impossible to see under DOS/Windows - in this case
> the mangling is to change these filenames into
> something Windows can use. Remember, these
> 'illegal' characters can be valid in a
> pathname sent *from* the client (wildcards
> etc), just not in a pathname sent back.
> 
> The isdoschar has a different use, within the
> is_8_3 function, to determine if a name is
> a valid 8.3 to send back to the client.
> 
> The multibyte codepage stuff is not affected
> by this code (check out the skip_multibyte_char)
> call in mangle_name_83().
> 
> Jeremy.

-- 
Christopher R. Hertel -)-----                   University of Minnesota
crh at nts.umn.edu              Networking and Telecommunications Services