Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

> The problem is with how the original request is generated, not how it
> is encoded.

Sorry, right. That's what I should have said. And explicitly applying an
encoding to finagle the wrong characters into the right bytes is not the
way to go, I now realize.

> So what is the problem with using unibyte-string for producing a
> unibyte string from a list of bytes? It sounds like it's exactly what
> is needed here, and is actually used in some places in socks.el.

Ah, that's the ticket. Thanks. I've also moved the conversion business
out of socks-send-command and into its caller where it's hopefully a
better fit.