Re: BUG #19354: JOHAB rejects valid byte sequences
| От | Heikki Linnakangas |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: BUG #19354: JOHAB rejects valid byte sequences |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 6a8122ac-123d-4e93-9269-0b3be1e4a5a4@iki.fi обсуждение |
| Ответ на | Re: BUG #19354: JOHAB rejects valid byte sequences (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: BUG #19354: JOHAB rejects valid byte sequences
Re: BUG #19354: JOHAB rejects valid byte sequences |
| Список | pgsql-bugs |
On 14/04/2026 09:30, Thomas Munro wrote: > On Wed, Dec 17, 2025 at 7:43 AM Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: >> I think there is a good chance that the right going-forward fix is to >> deprecate the encoding, because according to >> https://www.unicode.org/Public/MAPPINGS/EASTASIA/ReadMe.txt this and >> everything else that's now under >> https://www.unicode.org/Public/MAPPINGS/OBSOLETE/EASTASIA/ were >> deprecated in 2001. By the time v19 is released, the deprecation will >> be a quarter-century old, and the fact that it doesn't work is good >> evidence that few people will miss it, though perhaps the original >> poster will want to put forward an argument for why we should still >> care about this. > > Right, that stuff was withdrawn, along with the BIG5 and JIS X 0212 > mappings (here's some interesting discussion about their normative > status[1]). From what I can figure out, JOHAB was an MS-DOS codepage > (1361), obsoleted by UHC (949) some time around MS-DOS 6.22 or MS-DOS > 7 and Windows 95. > > So +1 from me, set the phasers to git rm. +1 > Based on the comments for enum pg_enc, we don't need to worry about > numerical stability of client-only encodings, so I just deleted it > (unlike PG_MULE_INTERNAL which became PG_UNUSED_1). Ok. I hope there are no 8.2-era client programs out there that are still abusing pg_wchar.h. I think we're good, but we've never really exercised the strategy that was laid out in commit 8468146b03c8. > Wait until 20, or just do it now? Let's just do it now. - Heikki
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: