[#7955] Failing tests in ruby since 1.8.2 — "Caleb Tennis" <caleb@...>
The following tests have been failing in Ruby for a long time, including
[#7978] Patch for Unix socket peer credentials — "James F. Hranicky" <jfh@...>
This patch adds support for getting the uid and gid of the peer
In article <200606091528.30171.jfh@cise.ufl.edu>,
On Friday 16 June 2006 11:51, Tanaka Akira wrote:
In article <200606161327.35948.jfh@cise.ufl.edu>,
On Saturday 17 June 2006 06:27, Tanaka Akira wrote:
In article <200607101352.16804.jfh@cise.ufl.edu>,
On Tuesday 11 July 2006 00:10, Tanaka Akira wrote:
Hi,
On Thursday 13 July 2006 22:48, nobu@ruby-lang.org wrote:
On Jul 18, 2006, at 12:27 PM, James F. Hranicky wrote:
On Tuesday 18 July 2006 15:52, Eric Hodel wrote:
[#7994] Ruby Kaigi date confusion — "Charles O Nutter" <headius@...>
I'm quite confused by the dates I have seen reported on various Ruby Kaigi
[#8013] Download page on ruby-lang has numeric URL — Hugh Sasse <hgs@...>
This is off-topic to ruby-core, but possibly core to ruby's uptake:
On Jun 19, 2006, at 3:32 AM, Hugh Sasse wrote:
[#8038] bug in $. ? — Wybo Dekker <wybo@...>
wybo>cat t
Wybo Dekker schrieb:
Pit Capitain wrote:
[#8050] Thank-you to the Rails Core Team — Dave Teare <devlists-ruby-core@...>
While we were listening to Dave Thomas' Keynote address today at
[#8061] Win32 Extension Issues Wanted! — "Austin Ziegler" <halostatue@...>
Everyone. I had a conversation with folks from Microsoft today about
[#8065] Core documentation patches — Alex Young <alex@...>
Hi there,
Hi,
Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
[#8073] 1.8.5p1 build failure on Solaris 10 — "Daniel Berger" <Daniel.Berger@...>
Solaris 10
Hi,
Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
>>>>> "D" == Daniel Berger <Daniel.Berger@qwest.com> writes:
ts <decoux@moulon.inra.fr> wrote on 28.06.2006 17:37:00:
Hi,
Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org> wrote on 29.06.2006 20:02:11:
Hi,
Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org> wrote on 29.06.2006 20:53:20:
ville.mattila@stonesoft.com wrote:
[#8087] optparse.rb to RDoc documentation patch — <noreply@...>
Patches item #4879, was opened at 2006-06-28 20:50
On Jun 28, 2006, at 11:50 AM, <noreply@rubyforge.org>
[#8102] Reorganizing configure.in by platform? — "Daniel Berger" <Daniel.Berger@...>
Hi,
Re: xmlrpc and charset=utf-8
I first sent this from the wrong email account, so if that post somehow makes its way onto the list, then please forgive the repitition. On Monday 19 June 2006 13:35, Kazuhiro NISHIYAMA wrote: > > Was this ever addressed? I vote for both a default of > > utf8 and an accessor method. > > http://www.zvon.org/tmRFC/RFC3023/Output/chapter8.html#sub5 > > | This example shows text/xml with the charset parameter omitted. > | In this case, MIME and XML processors MUST assume the charset is > | "us-ascii" This is interesting. It seems to be at odds with the XML specification, which says: http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/PER-xml-20060614/#charencoding > In the absence of information provided by an external transport protocol > (e.g. HTTP or MIME), it is a fatal error for an entity including an > encoding declaration to be presented to the XML processor in an encoding > other than that named in the declaration, or for an entity which begins > with neither a Byte Order Mark nor an encoding declaration to use an > encoding other than UTF-8. Note that since ASCII is a subset of UTF-8, > ordinary ASCII entities do not strictly need an encoding declaration. I read this to say that XML documents, in the absence of both external encoding information or an XML declaration, must be assumed to be UTF-8. RFC3023 appears to be saying that XML documents default to US-ASCII. Now, granted, RFC3023 is a transport protocol, and they're basically saying that if you don't specific the encoding then assume that the content is US-ASCII. However, I find it strange that they specifically require XML processors to assume that unannotated documents are ASCII encoded, which is in opposition to the XML spec. In any case, it appears that the Ruby XML-RPC library is handling data correctly, while the C library is not (since it appears to be ignoring the HTTP header encoding information). --- SER Confidentiality Notice This e-mail (including any attachments) is intended only for the recipients named above. It may contain confidential or privileged information and should not be read, copied or otherwise used by any other person. If you are not a named recipient, please notify the sender of that fact and delete the e-mail from your system.