[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: back-config, ucdata

At 07:26 PM 4/26/2004, Kurt D. Zeilenga wrote:
>At 07:07 PM 4/26/2004, Howard Chu wrote:
>>Another obstacle I've tripped over - we need the ucdata loaded before we can
>>start processing any LDIFs. It seems to me that we should just hardcode the
>>ucdata tables into liblunicode. Maybe ucgendat should spit out the data in C
>>source format, so that the arrays can be compiled in. Comments?
>That would resolve a number of issues with ucdata files
>(such as possible inability for files to be read when
>created on the same system).
>Also, using compiled tables would allow them to be integrated
>directly into -lldap, and facilitate -lldap implementation of
>LDAPprep and SASLprep.
>I'd be open to distributing the derived C file (in addition to
>tools which create it) so that it wouldn't have to be re-generated
>everywhere (which is generally a hassle).
>That is, maybe we should have build/ucdata tool which generated
>libraries/libldap/ucdata.c.  However, CVS (and releases) would
>include libraries/libldap/ucdata.c so that build/ucdata would not
>need to be built/ran by user.

Also, it would be good to update everything to Unicode 3.2.1
(the version of Unicode referenced in latest LDAP & SASL
draft specifications).