From:	Bruno Haible <haible AT ilog DOT fr>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Message-ID:	<15002.30384.227166.565569@honolulu.ilog.fr>
Date:	Mon, 26 Feb 2001 16:30:56 +0100 (CET)
To:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Cc:	Juan Manuel Guerrero <ST001906 AT HRZ1 DOT HRZ DOT TU-Darmstadt DOT De>,
	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: DJGPP specific patch for libiconv-1.5.1
In-Reply-To:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.1010226171812.24373D-100000@is>
References:	<15002 DOT 29001 DOT 659396 DOT 617614 AT honolulu DOT ilog DOT fr>
	<Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 1010226171812 DOT 24373D-100000 AT is>
X-Mailer:	VM 6.72 under 21.1 (patch 8) "Bryce Canyon" XEmacs Lucid
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

Eli Zaretskii writes:
> 
> > 	# Chinese
> > 	echo "zh_CN GBK"
> > 	echo "zh_TW CP950" # not CP938 ??
> 
> Is this Big5 or GB encoding?  The name GBK suggests the latter.
> AFAIK, Chinese GB is codepage 936, Big5 is indeed 950.

zh_TW normally uses Big5. But that MSDOS reference page mentioned
CP938, and I don't know what that is: there are no conversion tables
for it.

> > 	# Korean
> > 	echo "kr CP949"    # not CP934 ??
> > 	echo "kr_KR CP949" # not CP934 ??
> 
> AFAIK, 934 is correct.

Same here. I've never heard about CP934. CP949 is much more likely.

Bruno

- Raw text -