At 13:39 11/12/2002, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
Zeev Suraski wrote: > I did not choose to raise the issue at this time, but I agree > completely with the opinion that it's a bad thing; It is my fault that > I haven't raised it a few months ago when I noticed this change, but as > you might have noticed, I wasn't involved at php-dev back then.I did not mean to offend you.
I wasn't offended (seriously).
> Not sure what AFAICS translates to (lost you in the last 'S' in there) as far as I can see
Ah, right :)
I don't think that having choosing different names based on build flags is a good idea. It's another kind of recipe for confusion.> But either way, the fact that it was changed months ago is meaningless. I agree. What about installing the sapi/cli binary as "php" when a SAPI apart from sapi/cgi is chosen? Clearly someone who, let's say, builds his or her PHP --with-apxs has no need for a CGI binary. Or do I miss something?
Guys, fact is that it doesn't matter that much what this binary is called. We can call it bhb for all practical purposes (not that I'm suggesting that). People will get used to whatever it's named.
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/>
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
