i18n question.

[Jeremy Allison]

On Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 06:28:23PM +0900, Shiro Yamada wrote:
> 
> Preparing two separate paths, one with fast routine and the other
> with slow one, does not have good influences on Samba. Although it
> may satisfy the neeed of using MB characters, it will sacrifise
> the leanness of Samba, making it prone to bugs.

Yes, but it's the only way to get

> Considering these two rather conflicting factors, the only sensible
> way to solve these issues is to unify the Samba's internal character
> code into unicode (UCS2) whatever a user specified as `unix charset',
> as Kenichi Okuyama has suggested. If we do that, not only it will
> improve the performance of Samba MB capabilities but also the
> maintainability of Samba, as we won't need to prepare two identical
> functions one for asciis and the other for MB strings. All the string
> comparisons, standardisations and replacements would be done based
> on unicode.

Unfortunately we still need to do mb comparisons even with UCS2-LE
due to the compose character insanity.

So it doesn't really help us much at all.

Jeremy.