Re: [Banshee-List] Why is filename sanitation so strict?

[Dave Steinberg <dmsteinberg gmail com>]

On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 1:50 AM, John Millikin <jmillikin gmail com> wrote:
>
> For reference, the set of printable-but-illegal characters in Fat32 (a
> superset of Ext3 and HFS illegal characters): " * / : < > ? \ |

Hi John,

Thanks for drawing attention to this issue.  I would also like to see
these kinds of improvements.  Poorly handled corner cases really can
drive one to distraction.

One question, though: I noticed that your patch for bug 458224 leaves
one additional character that's not in the above list (') in
invalid_path_characters.  Why is that?  Is it actually illegal on
FAT32 (i.e., was it an omission in your list), or is there another
common file system where it's not allowed?

I ask because it's a *very* common character, and so it's probably the
one whose removal annoys me the most.

Cheers,
Dave