> -----Original Message----- > From: Leigh [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2016 3:02 PM > To: [email protected]; Anatol Belski <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [PECL-DEV] [ANNOUNCEMENT] mcrypt-1.0.0 (snapshot) Released. > 'PECL Announce' <[email protected]> > > On 13/12/16 13:31, Anatol Belski wrote: > > Hi Leigh, > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: PECL Announce [mailto:[email protected]] > >> Sent: Monday, December 12, 2016 6:37 PM > >> To: PECL developers list <[email protected]> > >> Subject: [PECL-DEV] [ANNOUNCEMENT] mcrypt-1.0.0 (snapshot) Released. > >> > >> The new PECL package mcrypt-1.0.0 (snapshot) has been released at > >> http://pecl.php.net/. > >> > > An issue with the Windows build service just turned out, as the PECL > > package targets PHP 7.1 as lowest version. As ext/mcrypt is a part of > > the core there, the build script produced conflicting build configs > > and misbehaved also with other packages. Could it possibly make sense, > > to target PHP 7.2 as the lowest version? > > > > Thanks > > > > Anatol > > > > Hey Anatol, > > I originally had it set as 7.2 but Joe recommended I target the minimum > version > the extension will compile for (7.1). > > It seems there is no way to specify a different version for windows, only the > option to exclude windows completely. > > I feel that is a conflict to have the same extension in core and PECL > available to > the same version of PHP, so I will update the minimum to 7.2 > Particularly with Windows bulid, it's enforced static in the standard build, but for PECL everything has to be shared. The scripts are simply not prepared for this situation, as some standard options are hardcoded in the configs. I went further and looked what other distributions do, seems mcrypt is often delivered shared otherwise, so there are separate packages like php7.0-mcrypt or php5-mcrypt. Theoretically, it wouldn't conflict on such distributions, if user decides to fetch the PECL package instead of the repo one. It'd be only a conflict, if mcrypt is either compiled statically, or if distro and PECL package are mixed. Probably it's still cleaner to keep the PECL package as a separate instance there, or at least I would have to check for a workaround for the build scripts. I see, that's you already pushed an update with 7.2 as min required, so probably the decision is met 😊
Thanks Anatol -- PECL development discussion Mailing List (http://pecl.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
