> From David.Comay at Sun.COM Wed Mar 21 15:19:14 2007
> Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 15:19:09 -0700 (PDT)
> From: David.Comay at Sun.COM
> To: Gary Winiger <gww at eng.sun.com>
> cc: PSARC-EXT at Sun.COM, bart.smaalders at Sun.COM, Stefan.Teleman at Sun.COM
> Subject: Re: PSARC/2007/168 Including PHP5 with Solaris
>
> > Why shouldn't 64 bit libraries be part of the initial putback?
>
> Speaking for myself, although I believe delivering 64-bit versions of
> the support libraries makes sense (assuming the open source components
> are 64-bit clean), I don't believe delivering a 64-bit PHP is necessary
> at this time.
Agreed that's why I said libraries.
> >> The proposed directory layout for PHP5 is:
> >> /usr/php5/
> >> bin -> [version]/bin
> >> doc -> [version]/doc
> >> etc -> /etc/php5
> >> include -> [version]/include
> >> lib -> [version]/lib
I guess what's missing here is .../lib/32 -> .
and .../lib/64
> >> man -> [version]/man
> >> modules -> [version]/modules
> >> share -> [version]/share
> >
> > I don't have a particular issue with this naming scheme for
> > managing change. What I'd like to have stated is if there
> > is a precedent that is being followed and where that
> > precedent was established. And, if there isn't an established
> > precedent, if this case is intended to set the precedent.
>
> I believe the precedent that is being followed here is that of Perl
> (PSARC 1999/192).
Fine. Just asking.
Gary..
