On 02-03-25 18:03:56 CET, Stephen Sprunk wrote: > Thus spake Robert Joop: > > the explanation of the -utf8 option doesn't make sense, does it?
> I think the document means "8-bit characters in an unspecified code > page" instead of ASCII; however, there's no short term for that. so what? from the man you like to quote: "make it as simple as possible, but no simpler." if it needs a few more words, so be it, but IMHO the text should be correct. > Here's the more interesting question: why do we have a switch for > UTF-8 encoding, instead of determining it from the user's locale? what is the canonical way to detect this? (even though i contributed the use of setlocale(3) to less(1) many years ago, i'm not sure how to do it. UTF-8 was not yet popular then.) perhaps we should look at how `locale charmap` does it? looking at glibc-2.2.5/locale/programs/locale.c it seems to use some internal information, from ../categories.def, that is not available to normal programs? the -utf8 should be left there anyway as an additional option, because some systems don't have proper locale software? rj ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]