[PHP-WEBMASTER] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-WEBMASTER] RE: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources?
Pierre Joye in php.internals (Wed, 17 Jun 2015 06:07:14 +0700): If we do it, we will also need the ability to do independent releases in case we need to update one of the dependencies (not code change, only provide updates for one or the other DLLs in case of critical security issues). YM, like libcurl right now. Jan -- PHP Webmaster List Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-WEBMASTER] Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources?
On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 3:19 AM, Stanislav Malyshev smalys...@gmail.com wrote: Hi! about signing, recently I got a question that somebody couldn't verify the tarball signature, because he was trying to verify the extracted contents instead of the compressed file. he was trying to do that, because that is how the kernel.org http://kernel.org releases are signed: https://www.kernel.org/signature.html#using-gnupg-to-verify-kernel-signatures I far as I understood, this one verifies .tar - i.e. uncompressed, but not extracted. Am I wrong? If that's right, then it doesn't solve the issue with .zip. -- Stas Malyshev smalys...@gmail.com yep, that doesn't solves the separate signing of zips, buth one signature would be enough for all tar.* files -- Ferenc Kovács @Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu
[PHP-WEBMASTER] Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources?
On Tue, 2015-06-16 at 02:02 +0200, Christoph Becker wrote: Johannes Schlüter wrote: On Tue, 2015-06-16 at 00:02 +0200, Christoph Becker wrote: Why should these downloads be disabled? They contain exactly what could be checked out from the respective tag. It is not including the generated parsers. This means the user might use a different version, which might cause a bug which might be hard to debug as usage of provided files is assumed. Fair enough. However, the Windows sources neither contain the generated parser files, because they would break linking on Windows, see http://news.php.net/php.internals/86685. This is a bug and has to be addressed. johannes -- PHP Webmaster List Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-WEBMASTER] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-WEBMASTER] RE: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources?
On Mon, 2015-06-15 at 22:45 +0700, Pierre Joye wrote: Yep, this could work and were probably proper solution. Except we wouldn't add some issue for the non Windows users :) I'm not sure, why is it done so ATM, probably it has its historical reasons. But this would probably cause us need to update the release process procedure? And, for PHP7 or for any other as well? Currently that zipball is just generated with the build process, so it'll need to be sent over somehow. Were anyway doable, wondering what the other RMs would say. Frankly, I'd leave it as it is - as long as it's reachable and documented. The reason is that we generate zip for binaries, and we just do the same for the src, providing zip archives using the same naming convention. We know many other tools relying on these zip, normalized URLs, so we must keep them. It does not hurt anyone anyway. As I said in early 5.3 times already: I'd love if we'd find a process and layout to have a single source for all downloads and distribute all downloads from our mirror network, not having Windows as second class citizen somewhere else but via all ~70 mirrors. Yes this would hurt short term as we'd have to change some processes and yes it might change URLs (which can be solved via proper redirects) but long term users get faster downloads and a single place to go with no confusion like the one that started this thread. johannes signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
[PHP-WEBMASTER] Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources?
Hi! about signing, recently I got a question that somebody couldn't verify the tarball signature, because he was trying to verify the extracted contents instead of the compressed file. he was trying to do that, because that is how the kernel.org http://kernel.org releases are signed: https://www.kernel.org/signature.html#using-gnupg-to-verify-kernel-signatures I far as I understood, this one verifies .tar - i.e. uncompressed, but not extracted. Am I wrong? If that's right, then it doesn't solve the issue with .zip. -- Stas Malyshev smalys...@gmail.com -- PHP Webmaster List Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-WEBMASTER] Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources?
On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 12:42 AM, Stanislav Malyshev smalys...@gmail.com wrote: Hi! Then this fix doesn't make any sense -- you are saying if I download the .tar.gz and .zip and extract those two, I will have precisely the same sources? Should be the same sources. We shouldn't distribute anything that isn't under the respective tag as official sources, so I assume they are. Making them part of the distro may not be a bad idea too, this way they can be signed. Of course, signing one more file is 33 to 50% more work, but I think RMs can deal with it. about signing, recently I got a question that somebody couldn't verify the tarball signature, because he was trying to verify the extracted contents instead of the compressed file. he was trying to do that, because that is how the kernel.org releases are signed: https://www.kernel.org/signature.html#using-gnupg-to-verify-kernel-signatures and they do that because that way you only need one signature for a given release regardless of the number of compression formats you provide. maybe this is something what we should consider also. -- Ferenc Kovács @Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu
[PHP-WEBMASTER] RE: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources?
Hi Hannes, Nope, it's the same source and the same tag is always used. The tag is the actual reference for any release. But usually people on Windows don't have things like tar,gz and others. Even if they have - the compatibility might be just bad. So it's zipped. Regards Anatol -Original Message- From: Hannes Magnusson [mailto:hannes.magnus...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, June 15, 2015 3:52 PM To: Anatol Belski; PHP Development Cc: PHP Webmaster ML Subject: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources? What is the difference between Windows Sources and our official releases? Did windows.php.net fork php or something? Embedded other things? Are the binaries really not generated from the official sources? This sounds like a horrible idea if true. -Hannes On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 5:39 AM, Anatol Belski a...@php.net wrote: Commit:9883c8f0bbcb64ad42ce66d694fffd848fc2ebcc Author:Anatol Belski a...@php.net Mon, 15 Jun 2015 14:39:31 +0200 Parents: d7f7d44e25c4bb43de7696db47189026428daaac Branches: master Link: http://git.php.net/?p=web/php.git;a=commitdiff;h=9883c8f0bbcb64ad42ce66d6 94fffd848fc2ebcc Log: apply patch from bug #69829 And, we probably should keep this wording in the next announcement Bugs: https://bugs.php.net/69829 Changed paths: M archive/entries/2015-06-11-3.xml Diff: diff --git a/archive/entries/2015-06-11-3.xml b/archive/entries/2015-06-11-3.xml index 232dcee..be5d386 100644 --- a/archive/entries/2015-06-11-3.xml +++ b/archive/entries/2015-06-11-3.xml @@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ p For source downloads of PHP 7.0.0 Alpha 1 please visit - the a href=https://downloads.php.net/ab/;download page/a, Windows binaries + the a href=https://downloads.php.net/ab/;download page/a, + Windows sources and binaries can be found on a href=http://windows.php.net/qa/;windows.php.net/qa//a. /p -- PHP Webmaster List Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Webmaster List Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-WEBMASTER] Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources?
Then this fix doesn't make any sense -- you are saying if I download the .tar.gz and .zip and extract those two, I will have precisely the same sources? Then this fix should be reverted as there is isn't any special Windows Sources and the official releases should work just fine. -Hannes On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 7:02 AM, Anatol Belski anatol@belski.net wrote: Hi Hannes, Nope, it's the same source and the same tag is always used. The tag is the actual reference for any release. But usually people on Windows don't have things like tar,gz and others. Even if they have - the compatibility might be just bad. So it's zipped. Regards Anatol -Original Message- From: Hannes Magnusson [mailto:hannes.magnus...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, June 15, 2015 3:52 PM To: Anatol Belski; PHP Development Cc: PHP Webmaster ML Subject: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources? What is the difference between Windows Sources and our official releases? Did windows.php.net fork php or something? Embedded other things? Are the binaries really not generated from the official sources? This sounds like a horrible idea if true. -Hannes On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 5:39 AM, Anatol Belski a...@php.net wrote: Commit:9883c8f0bbcb64ad42ce66d694fffd848fc2ebcc Author:Anatol Belski a...@php.net Mon, 15 Jun 2015 14:39:31 +0200 Parents: d7f7d44e25c4bb43de7696db47189026428daaac Branches: master Link: http://git.php.net/?p=web/php.git;a=commitdiff;h=9883c8f0bbcb64ad42ce66d6 94fffd848fc2ebcc Log: apply patch from bug #69829 And, we probably should keep this wording in the next announcement Bugs: https://bugs.php.net/69829 Changed paths: M archive/entries/2015-06-11-3.xml Diff: diff --git a/archive/entries/2015-06-11-3.xml b/archive/entries/2015-06-11-3.xml index 232dcee..be5d386 100644 --- a/archive/entries/2015-06-11-3.xml +++ b/archive/entries/2015-06-11-3.xml @@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ p For source downloads of PHP 7.0.0 Alpha 1 please visit - the a href=https://downloads.php.net/ab/;download page/a, Windows binaries + the a href=https://downloads.php.net/ab/;download page/a, + Windows sources and binaries can be found on a href=http://windows.php.net/qa/;windows.php.net/qa//a. /p -- PHP Webmaster List Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Webmaster List Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-WEBMASTER] Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources?
I thought the files generated by genfiles for the linux tarballs are different in the windows zips. On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 4:02 PM, Anatol Belski anatol@belski.net wrote: Hi Hannes, Nope, it's the same source and the same tag is always used. The tag is the actual reference for any release. But usually people on Windows don't have things like tar,gz and others. Even if they have - the compatibility might be just bad. So it's zipped. Regards Anatol -Original Message- From: Hannes Magnusson [mailto:hannes.magnus...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, June 15, 2015 3:52 PM To: Anatol Belski; PHP Development Cc: PHP Webmaster ML Subject: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources? What is the difference between Windows Sources and our official releases? Did windows.php.net fork php or something? Embedded other things? Are the binaries really not generated from the official sources? This sounds like a horrible idea if true. -Hannes On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 5:39 AM, Anatol Belski a...@php.net wrote: Commit:9883c8f0bbcb64ad42ce66d694fffd848fc2ebcc Author:Anatol Belski a...@php.net Mon, 15 Jun 2015 14:39:31 +0200 Parents: d7f7d44e25c4bb43de7696db47189026428daaac Branches: master Link: http://git.php.net/?p=web/php.git;a=commitdiff;h=9883c8f0bbcb64ad42ce66d6 94fffd848fc2ebcc Log: apply patch from bug #69829 And, we probably should keep this wording in the next announcement Bugs: https://bugs.php.net/69829 Changed paths: M archive/entries/2015-06-11-3.xml Diff: diff --git a/archive/entries/2015-06-11-3.xml b/archive/entries/2015-06-11-3.xml index 232dcee..be5d386 100644 --- a/archive/entries/2015-06-11-3.xml +++ b/archive/entries/2015-06-11-3.xml @@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ p For source downloads of PHP 7.0.0 Alpha 1 please visit - the a href=https://downloads.php.net/ab/;download page/a, Windows binaries + the a href=https://downloads.php.net/ab/;download page/a, + Windows sources and binaries can be found on a href=http://windows.php.net/qa/;windows.php.net/qa//a. /p -- PHP Webmaster List Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- Ferenc Kovács @Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu
Re: [PHP-WEBMASTER] RE: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources?
On Jun 15, 2015 10:38 PM, Anatol Belski anatol@belski.net wrote: Hi Johannes, -Original Message- From: Johannes Schlüter [mailto:johan...@schlueters.de] Sent: Monday, June 15, 2015 4:52 PM To: Christoph Becker Cc: Hannes Magnusson; Anatol Belski; PHP Development; PHP Webmaster ML Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources? On Mon, 2015-06-15 at 16:20 +0200, Christoph Becker wrote: Hannes Magnusson wrote: Then this fix doesn't make any sense -- you are saying if I download the .tar.gz and .zip and extract those two, I will have precisely the same sources? Then this fix should be reverted as there is isn't any special Windows Sources and the official releases should work just fine. There is some difference (timestamps?) which causes building from the tarred sources to fail on Windows (see bug #69829). touching generated files as part of the packaging process is a good idea for all platforms. Furthermore extracting the tarred sources with 7zip (which seems to be a pretty common archiver) results in spurious PaxHeaders.# directories, what is bug in 7zip[1], and doesn't really affect the build, but is confusing nonetheless (and requires more disk space). At least until these issue are solved, IMO it's better to link to the Windows sources packaged as .zip. If there is a need for zip archives I'd put them next to tar.gz etc. and distribute them via our mirror network. Yep, this could work and were probably proper solution. Except we wouldn't add some issue for the non Windows users :) I'm not sure, why is it done so ATM, probably it has its historical reasons. But this would probably cause us need to update the release process procedure? And, for PHP7 or for any other as well? Currently that zipball is just generated with the build process, so it'll need to be sent over somehow. Were anyway doable, wondering what the other RMs would say. Frankly, I'd leave it as it is - as long as it's reachable and documented. The reason is that we generate zip for binaries, and we just do the same for the src, providing zip archives using the same naming convention. We know many other tools relying on these zip, normalized URLs, so we must keep them. It does not hurt anyone anyway. As of fork, custom patches etc, there is no such thing. Cheers, Pierre
[PHP-WEBMASTER] RE: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources?
Yep, the generated files in Windows are just the same as in the tag. But what I’m talking about the package format itself. As the difference in the generated files doesn’t mean something changed in the release itself. Regards Anatol From: Ferenc Kovacs [mailto:tyr...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, June 15, 2015 4:23 PM To: Anatol Belski Cc: Hannes Magnusson; Anatol Belski; PHP Development; PHP Webmaster ML Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources? I thought the files generated by genfiles for the linux tarballs are different in the windows zips. On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 4:02 PM, Anatol Belski anatol@belski.net mailto:anatol@belski.net wrote: Hi Hannes, Nope, it's the same source and the same tag is always used. The tag is the actual reference for any release. But usually people on Windows don't have things like tar,gz and others. Even if they have - the compatibility might be just bad. So it's zipped. Regards Anatol -Original Message- From: Hannes Magnusson [mailto:hannes.magnus...@gmail.com mailto:hannes.magnus...@gmail.com ] Sent: Monday, June 15, 2015 3:52 PM To: Anatol Belski; PHP Development Cc: PHP Webmaster ML Subject: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources? What is the difference between Windows Sources and our official releases? Did windows.php.net http://windows.php.net fork php or something? Embedded other things? Are the binaries really not generated from the official sources? This sounds like a horrible idea if true. -Hannes On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 5:39 AM, Anatol Belski a...@php.net mailto:a...@php.net wrote: Commit:9883c8f0bbcb64ad42ce66d694fffd848fc2ebcc Author:Anatol Belski a...@php.net mailto:a...@php.net Mon, 15 Jun 2015 14:39:31 +0200 Parents: d7f7d44e25c4bb43de7696db47189026428daaac Branches: master Link: http://git.php.net/?p=web/php.git;a=commitdiff;h=9883c8f0bbcb64ad42ce66d6 94fffd848fc2ebcc Log: apply patch from bug #69829 And, we probably should keep this wording in the next announcement Bugs: https://bugs.php.net/69829 Changed paths: M archive/entries/2015-06-11-3.xml Diff: diff --git a/archive/entries/2015-06-11-3.xml b/archive/entries/2015-06-11-3.xml index 232dcee..be5d386 100644 --- a/archive/entries/2015-06-11-3.xml +++ b/archive/entries/2015-06-11-3.xml @@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ p For source downloads of PHP 7.0.0 Alpha 1 please visit - the a href=https://downloads.php.net/ab/;download page/a, Windows binaries + the a href=https://downloads.php.net/ab/;download page/a, + Windows sources and binaries can be found on a href=http://windows.php.net/qa/;windows.php.net/qa/ http://windows.php.net/qa/ /a. /p -- PHP Webmaster List Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- Ferenc Kovács @Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu
[PHP-WEBMASTER] RE: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources?
Hi Johannes, -Original Message- From: Johannes Schlüter [mailto:johan...@schlueters.de] Sent: Monday, June 15, 2015 4:52 PM To: Christoph Becker Cc: Hannes Magnusson; Anatol Belski; PHP Development; PHP Webmaster ML Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources? On Mon, 2015-06-15 at 16:20 +0200, Christoph Becker wrote: Hannes Magnusson wrote: Then this fix doesn't make any sense -- you are saying if I download the .tar.gz and .zip and extract those two, I will have precisely the same sources? Then this fix should be reverted as there is isn't any special Windows Sources and the official releases should work just fine. There is some difference (timestamps?) which causes building from the tarred sources to fail on Windows (see bug #69829). touching generated files as part of the packaging process is a good idea for all platforms. Furthermore extracting the tarred sources with 7zip (which seems to be a pretty common archiver) results in spurious PaxHeaders.# directories, what is bug in 7zip[1], and doesn't really affect the build, but is confusing nonetheless (and requires more disk space). At least until these issue are solved, IMO it's better to link to the Windows sources packaged as .zip. If there is a need for zip archives I'd put them next to tar.gz etc. and distribute them via our mirror network. Yep, this could work and were probably proper solution. Except we wouldn't add some issue for the non Windows users :) I'm not sure, why is it done so ATM, probably it has its historical reasons. But this would probably cause us need to update the release process procedure? And, for PHP7 or for any other as well? Currently that zipball is just generated with the build process, so it'll need to be sent over somehow. Were anyway doable, wondering what the other RMs would say. Frankly, I'd leave it as it is - as long as it's reachable and documented. Regards Anatol -- PHP Webmaster List Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-WEBMASTER] Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources?
On Mon, 2015-06-15 at 16:20 +0200, Christoph Becker wrote: Hannes Magnusson wrote: Then this fix doesn't make any sense -- you are saying if I download the .tar.gz and .zip and extract those two, I will have precisely the same sources? Then this fix should be reverted as there is isn't any special Windows Sources and the official releases should work just fine. There is some difference (timestamps?) which causes building from the tarred sources to fail on Windows (see bug #69829). touching generated files as part of the packaging process is a good idea for all platforms. Furthermore extracting the tarred sources with 7zip (which seems to be a pretty common archiver) results in spurious PaxHeaders.# directories, what is bug in 7zip[1], and doesn't really affect the build, but is confusing nonetheless (and requires more disk space). At least until these issue are solved, IMO it's better to link to the Windows sources packaged as .zip. If there is a need for zip archives I'd put them next to tar.gz etc. and distribute them via our mirror network. johannes signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
[PHP-WEBMASTER] RE: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources?
Yeah, it makes sense, just if you look into the bug #69829 . It was extracted from the tarball packaged on Linux, and it went wrong. Also I've just found the same issue reported with drupal - https://groups.drupal.org/node/315878 PaxHeaders and all that. We probably don't want to receive more such bug tickets and spend time on them, so more clarification will only do a good job. More info so people just use compatible package which extracts out of the box (eq zip can be opened just with the normal explorer). Btw I just got the same when I use 7-zip on Windows with our official tarball, even the older one. Regards Anatol -Original Message- From: Hannes Magnusson [mailto:hannes.magnus...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, June 15, 2015 4:08 PM To: Anatol Belski Cc: Anatol Belski; PHP Development; PHP Webmaster ML Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources? Then this fix doesn't make any sense -- you are saying if I download the .tar.gz and .zip and extract those two, I will have precisely the same sources? Then this fix should be reverted as there is isn't any special Windows Sources and the official releases should work just fine. -Hannes On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 7:02 AM, Anatol Belski anatol@belski.net wrote: Hi Hannes, Nope, it's the same source and the same tag is always used. The tag is the actual reference for any release. But usually people on Windows don't have things like tar,gz and others. Even if they have - the compatibility might be just bad. So it's zipped. Regards Anatol -Original Message- From: Hannes Magnusson [mailto:hannes.magnus...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, June 15, 2015 3:52 PM To: Anatol Belski; PHP Development Cc: PHP Webmaster ML Subject: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources? What is the difference between Windows Sources and our official releases? Did windows.php.net fork php or something? Embedded other things? Are the binaries really not generated from the official sources? This sounds like a horrible idea if true. -Hannes On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 5:39 AM, Anatol Belski a...@php.net wrote: Commit:9883c8f0bbcb64ad42ce66d694fffd848fc2ebcc Author:Anatol Belski a...@php.net Mon, 15 Jun 2015 14:39:31 +0200 Parents: d7f7d44e25c4bb43de7696db47189026428daaac Branches: master Link: http://git.php.net/?p=web/php.git;a=commitdiff;h=9883c8f0bbcb64ad42ce66d6 94fffd848fc2ebcc Log: apply patch from bug #69829 And, we probably should keep this wording in the next announcement Bugs: https://bugs.php.net/69829 Changed paths: M archive/entries/2015-06-11-3.xml Diff: diff --git a/archive/entries/2015-06-11-3.xml b/archive/entries/2015-06-11-3.xml index 232dcee..be5d386 100644 --- a/archive/entries/2015-06-11-3.xml +++ b/archive/entries/2015-06-11-3.xml @@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ p For source downloads of PHP 7.0.0 Alpha 1 please visit - the a href=https://downloads.php.net/ab/;download page/a, Windows binaries + the a href=https://downloads.php.net/ab/;download page/a, + Windows sources and binaries can be found on a href=http://windows.php.net/qa/;windows.php.net/qa//a. /p -- PHP Webmaster List Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Webmaster List Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-WEBMASTER] Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources?
Johannes Schlüter in php.internals (Mon, 15 Jun 2015 16:52:12 +0200): If there is a need for zip archives I'd put them next to tar.gz etc. and distribute them via our mirror network. On github they are next to each other: https://github.com/php/php-src/releases Most of the times I use the zips, but it does not really matter anyway. Jan -- PHP Webmaster List Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-WEBMASTER] Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources?
On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 8:38 AM, Anatol Belski anatol@belski.net wrote: Hi Johannes, -Original Message- From: Johannes Schlüter [mailto:johan...@schlueters.de] Sent: Monday, June 15, 2015 4:52 PM To: Christoph Becker Cc: Hannes Magnusson; Anatol Belski; PHP Development; PHP Webmaster ML Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources? On Mon, 2015-06-15 at 16:20 +0200, Christoph Becker wrote: Hannes Magnusson wrote: Then this fix doesn't make any sense -- you are saying if I download the .tar.gz and .zip and extract those two, I will have precisely the same sources? Then this fix should be reverted as there is isn't any special Windows Sources and the official releases should work just fine. There is some difference (timestamps?) which causes building from the tarred sources to fail on Windows (see bug #69829). touching generated files as part of the packaging process is a good idea for all platforms. Furthermore extracting the tarred sources with 7zip (which seems to be a pretty common archiver) results in spurious PaxHeaders.# directories, what is bug in 7zip[1], and doesn't really affect the build, but is confusing nonetheless (and requires more disk space). At least until these issue are solved, IMO it's better to link to the Windows sources packaged as .zip. If there is a need for zip archives I'd put them next to tar.gz etc. and distribute them via our mirror network. Yep, this could work and were probably proper solution. Except we wouldn't add some issue for the non Windows users :) I'm not sure, why is it done so ATM, probably it has its historical reasons. But this would probably cause us need to update the release process procedure? And, for PHP7 or for any other as well? Currently that zipball is just generated with the build process, so it'll need to be sent over somehow. Were anyway doable, wondering what the other RMs would say. Frankly, I'd leave it as it is - as long as it's reachable and documented. Thats what we want. We want the official release balls to be generated by an official server using the official toolchain. There should never be a time when a Release Manager pulls up his notebook, does a checkout and packages that and uploads. Its bad enough we have this for pecl exts, but there is no reason for php-src to be playing with fire and infiltration agencies. That has unfortunately happened before, and resulted in us distributing .orig files (patch conflicts), .exp, .out, .php, ... (failed tests results) and even wrongly generated artifacts (due to wrong bison/re2c versions installed locally). We don't want that happen again. The official releases should be done on snap box, and be completely automated with no room for accidents. It produces several archives, and we can add .zip to that mix if not already available. It should be obvious that any binary distribution that aims to be official PHP.net release should use this official release, not some custom mix of things. It is important that these official binaries also don't regenerate the files in the archive. If there is an extra file (.w32?), or touching of files, required to make this archive usable to generate binaries from - then please fix the root problem; touch the file before the packaging (and update the README :)). -Hannes -- PHP Webmaster List Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-WEBMASTER] RE: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources?
Hi Hannes, -Original Message- From: Hannes Magnusson [mailto:hannes.magnus...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, June 15, 2015 8:34 PM To: Anatol Belski Cc: Johannes Schlüter; Christoph Becker; PHP Development; PHP Webmaster ML Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources? On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 8:38 AM, Anatol Belski anatol@belski.net wrote: Hi Johannes, -Original Message- From: Johannes Schlüter [mailto:johan...@schlueters.de] Sent: Monday, June 15, 2015 4:52 PM To: Christoph Becker Cc: Hannes Magnusson; Anatol Belski; PHP Development; PHP Webmaster ML Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources? On Mon, 2015-06-15 at 16:20 +0200, Christoph Becker wrote: Hannes Magnusson wrote: Then this fix doesn't make any sense -- you are saying if I download the .tar.gz and .zip and extract those two, I will have precisely the same sources? Then this fix should be reverted as there is isn't any special Windows Sources and the official releases should work just fine. There is some difference (timestamps?) which causes building from the tarred sources to fail on Windows (see bug #69829). touching generated files as part of the packaging process is a good idea for all platforms. Furthermore extracting the tarred sources with 7zip (which seems to be a pretty common archiver) results in spurious PaxHeaders.# directories, what is bug in 7zip[1], and doesn't really affect the build, but is confusing nonetheless (and requires more disk space). At least until these issue are solved, IMO it's better to link to the Windows sources packaged as .zip. If there is a need for zip archives I'd put them next to tar.gz etc. and distribute them via our mirror network. Yep, this could work and were probably proper solution. Except we wouldn't add some issue for the non Windows users :) I'm not sure, why is it done so ATM, probably it has its historical reasons. But this would probably cause us need to update the release process procedure? And, for PHP7 or for any other as well? Currently that zipball is just generated with the build process, so it'll need to be sent over somehow. Were anyway doable, wondering what the other RMs would say. Frankly, I'd leave it as it is - as long as it's reachable and documented. Thats what we want. We want the official release balls to be generated by an official server using the official toolchain. There should never be a time when a Release Manager pulls up his notebook, does a checkout and packages that and uploads. Its bad enough we have this for pecl exts, but there is no reason for php-src to be playing with fire and infiltration agencies. That has unfortunately happened before, and resulted in us distributing .orig files (patch conflicts), .exp, .out, .php, ... (failed tests results) and even wrongly generated artifacts (due to wrong bison/re2c versions installed locally). We don't want that happen again. The official releases should be done on snap box, and be completely automated with no room for accidents. It produces several archives, and we can add .zip to that mix if not already available. It's a worthy goal IMHO. Currently it all is done manually as you know. The question is only - to implement it. And that's where I'm a wrong person to talk to. Technically I could do it, but for time (and other) reasons - I couldn't. Also I'm not the person who makes decisions about the infrastructure. snaps.php.net is currently offline fe, maybe something based on that could be it for the start, at least for the source packaging. It should be obvious that any binary distribution that aims to be official PHP.net release should use this official release, not some custom mix of things. It is important that these official binaries also don't regenerate the files in the archive. If there is an extra file (.w32?), or touching of files, required to make this archive usable to generate binaries from - then please fix the root problem; touch the file before the packaging (and update the README :)). I can just repeat - no char in the code and changed. And the reference is the tag. Also, as we know now, those zipballs are needed for some external tools. I'll check how the touching generated files can work, but I don't think it's solving the tools incompatibility issue (tar, gz, xz, 7zip, etc.) between Windows and *nix. Hannes, I think you should address your concerns to the persons who actually induce. Such a global solution that you describe will probably require some consent, some good plan, material and human resources. I could help with implementation maybe, to some part. But right now, I think I'm more useful by doing the RM job and fixing bugs, so I should concentrate on that :) So I'm better out of this discussion. Regards Anatol -- PHP Webmaster List Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
[PHP-WEBMASTER] Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources?
On Mon, 2015-06-15 at 18:41 +0200, Jan Ehrhardt wrote: On github they are next to each other: https://github.com/php/php-src/releases Those don't include the generated parsers etc. we should disable these, while I couldn't find an option for that on github's site. johannes signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
[PHP-WEBMASTER] RE: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources?
-Original Message- From: Hannes Magnusson [mailto:hannes.magnus...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, June 15, 2015 10:29 PM To: Anatol Belski Cc: Johannes Schlüter; Christoph Becker; PHP Development; PHP Webmaster ML Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources? On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 12:51 PM, Anatol Belski anatol@belski.net wrote: Hi Hannes, -Original Message- From: Hannes Magnusson [mailto:hannes.magnus...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, June 15, 2015 8:34 PM To: Anatol Belski Cc: Johannes Schlüter; Christoph Becker; PHP Development; PHP Webmaster ML Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources? On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 8:38 AM, Anatol Belski anatol@belski.net wrote: Hi Johannes, -Original Message- From: Johannes Schlüter [mailto:johan...@schlueters.de] Sent: Monday, June 15, 2015 4:52 PM To: Christoph Becker Cc: Hannes Magnusson; Anatol Belski; PHP Development; PHP Webmaster ML Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources? On Mon, 2015-06-15 at 16:20 +0200, Christoph Becker wrote: Hannes Magnusson wrote: Then this fix doesn't make any sense -- you are saying if I download the .tar.gz and .zip and extract those two, I will have precisely the same sources? Then this fix should be reverted as there is isn't any special Windows Sources and the official releases should work just fine. There is some difference (timestamps?) which causes building from the tarred sources to fail on Windows (see bug #69829). touching generated files as part of the packaging process is a good idea for all platforms. Furthermore extracting the tarred sources with 7zip (which seems to be a pretty common archiver) results in spurious PaxHeaders.# directories, what is bug in 7zip[1], and doesn't really affect the build, but is confusing nonetheless (and requires more disk space). At least until these issue are solved, IMO it's better to link to the Windows sources packaged as .zip. If there is a need for zip archives I'd put them next to tar.gz etc. and distribute them via our mirror network. Yep, this could work and were probably proper solution. Except we wouldn't add some issue for the non Windows users :) I'm not sure, why is it done so ATM, probably it has its historical reasons. But this would probably cause us need to update the release process procedure? And, for PHP7 or for any other as well? Currently that zipball is just generated with the build process, so it'll need to be sent over somehow. Were anyway doable, wondering what the other RMs would say. Frankly, I'd leave it as it is - as long as it's reachable and documented. Thats what we want. We want the official release balls to be generated by an official server using the official toolchain. There should never be a time when a Release Manager pulls up his notebook, does a checkout and packages that and uploads. Its bad enough we have this for pecl exts, but there is no reason for php-src to be playing with fire and infiltration agencies. That has unfortunately happened before, and resulted in us distributing .orig files (patch conflicts), .exp, .out, .php, ... (failed tests results) and even wrongly generated artifacts (due to wrong bison/re2c versions installed locally). We don't want that happen again. The official releases should be done on snap box, and be completely automated with no room for accidents. It produces several archives, and we can add .zip to that mix if not already available. It's a worthy goal IMHO. Currently it all is done manually as you know. What! No, I didn't know. I was describing how the process used to be, and I thought it still was. Apparently this was dropped in December 2013: http://git.php.net/?p=php- src.git;a=blobdiff;f=README.RELEASE_PROCESS;h=a0c34f8f7aa5bf8782f394572 419167e7ff20c7b;hp=6cc9c4e9ab8fc3102f3fe142b100571362af6742;hb=3eb2b 1ac4008acd13f51244c7ba009fa381e79f7;hpb=6f739318fd3dc04a01aec762d449 949db481bf5d I think we need to fix this situation. Now that you have RMd your first release -- you do seem like the best person to ask for feedback: What were your pain points? What was the biggest time waste? What should be improved? I'm sure we can spin up a server and we script it so all you have to do is click a button. No accidental personal photos in the release archives or local malicious tool injecting itself into the archive. I wasn't yet doing it alone - thanks Ferenc who did many things beforehand, and Kalle managing the php.net news entry and several other things. A learn curve is planned, so until the final any of Kalle or me can do a release completely autonomously. I think a lot more releases need to be done to have a good enough understanding. However when looking at the
[PHP-WEBMASTER] Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources?
Johannes Schlüter wrote: On Mon, 2015-06-15 at 16:20 +0200, Christoph Becker wrote: There is some difference (timestamps?) which causes building from the tarred sources to fail on Windows (see bug #69829). touching generated files as part of the packaging process is a good idea for all platforms. The files generated from zend_language_parser.y are newer than the ZLP.y, and that caused the build to fail on my machine. After touching ZLP.y it worked. I had a closer look at the issue and found the problem is caused by zend_parse being defined as ZEND_API in zend_globals_macros.h, but as normal function in zend_language_parser.h/c. Fixing this provisionally let the build succeed, and also removing the declarations seems to work fine. -- Christoph M. Becker -- PHP Webmaster List Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-WEBMASTER] Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources?
Johannes Schlüter in php.internals (Mon, 15 Jun 2015 22:28:37 +0200): On Mon, 2015-06-15 at 18:41 +0200, Jan Ehrhardt wrote: On github they are next to each other: https://github.com/php/php-src/releases Those don't include the generated parsers etc. we should disable these, while I couldn't find an option for that on github's site. Is that a real problem? I always use those sources for my own Windows builds, because they are the first publicly available tarballs of a new release. BTW: if I am late at compiling a release, in most cases I choose the tar.xz, because it is the smallest. Jan -- PHP Webmaster List Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-WEBMASTER] Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources?
Jan Ehrhardt wrote: Johannes Schlüter in php.internals (Mon, 15 Jun 2015 22:28:37 +0200): On Mon, 2015-06-15 at 18:41 +0200, Jan Ehrhardt wrote: On github they are next to each other: https://github.com/php/php-src/releases Those don't include the generated parsers etc. we should disable these, while I couldn't find an option for that on github's site. Why should these downloads be disabled? They contain exactly what could be checked out from the respective tag. BTW: if I am late at compiling a release, in most cases I choose the tar.xz, because it is the smallest. Have you already tried to compile an php-7.0.0alpha1.tar.* on Windows. I suppose that would fail, see http://news.php.net/php.internals/86685. -- Christoph M. Becker -- PHP Webmaster List Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-WEBMASTER] Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources?
On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 3:46 PM, Stanislav Malyshev smalys...@gmail.com wrote: Hi! It's a worthy goal IMHO. Currently it all is done manually as you know. What! No, I didn't know. I was describing how the process used to be, and I thought it still was. I think making auto-release is a nice idea, but what about signing? I'm surely not leaving my personal private key on any commonly accessible server, so how would I sign packages? Except for that, making script that would do make release or sh scripts/release and complete the release cycle (including generating uploading everything) would be nice. Right now we have mkdist but it only takes us half-way. gpg-agent forwarding over ssh? - Goto https://release.php.net/ - Login with your master credentials (only allows logins for whitelisted users). - White page suggest you are creating x.y.z+1 release from branch x_y - If yes; press MAKE MAGIC - If no; write the version number in input field, select branch from combobox - Press; I KNOW WHAT IM DOING This will trigger generating all files needed, bumping version and whatever. Tags. Creates archives. All that good stuff. 5 minutes later you get email; release is ready! with links to the archives You fetch them, explore the archives, run the tests and you the things we all know we should do but don't :) Then: ssh -R ~username/.gnupg/S.gpg-agent -o StreamLocalBindUnlink=yes release.php.net '/usr/local/bin/confirm x.y.z+1' It'll sign the git tag (using your forwarded agent), push upstream, push archives to php-distribution.git Then. In the next release of the tool: - The whitepage extracts the NEWS entries and does the html/php formatting for phpweb - Gives you checkboxes to choose pick the highlights - The highlights will be used for the standard phpweb news xml. - Profit -Hannes -- PHP Webmaster List Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-WEBMASTER] Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources?
Hi! gpg-agent forwarding over ssh? Well, if that works then fine. I never tried it (actually didn't use the agent that much at all) but why not. - Goto https://release.php.net/ - Login with your master credentials (only allows logins for whitelisted users). - White page suggest you are creating x.y.z+1 release from branch x_y - If yes; press MAKE MAGIC - If no; write the version number in input field, select branch from combobox - Press; I KNOW WHAT IM DOING Looks good so far, except that I'd probably feel better doing the tag manually. First because it can be moved around (forgot to update news, last minute patch, made typo somewhere, added CVE, etc.), second again because it's signed and I kind of feel more confident knowing I (or other RM) is the guy who actually personally created that tag. It's not a very important point, just a preference, at least for me. If other RMs feel different then fine with it as is. ssh -R ~username/.gnupg/S.gpg-agent -o StreamLocalBindUnlink=yes release.php.net '/usr/local/bin/confirm x.y.z+1' It'll sign the git tag (using your forwarded agent), push upstream, push archives to php-distribution.git We need to sign the packages, not only tags. Creating tag is actually not that big a deal manually, it's one git command. Packaging from it is more involved. But if the agent works, yes, we can do it with scripts, that's fine. Then. In the next release of the tool: - The whitepage extracts the NEWS entries and does the html/php formatting for phpweb - Gives you checkboxes to choose pick the highlights - The highlights will be used for the standard phpweb news xml. - Profit I'm all for it. I know my RMship for 5.4 is will be done soon, so my personal profit from it would be pretty low, but for the sake of next RMs automating the dozen of manual tasks one has to do to roll the release would be a nice thing. We just need to be careful with phpweb, etc. patching given that we can have 3 branches being released in parallel, sometime conflicts happen. -- Stas Malyshev smalys...@gmail.com -- PHP Webmaster List Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-WEBMASTER] Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources?
On Tue, 2015-06-16 at 00:02 +0200, Christoph Becker wrote: Why should these downloads be disabled? They contain exactly what could be checked out from the respective tag. It is not including the generated parsers. This means the user might use a different version, which might cause a bug which might be hard to debug as usage of provided files is assumed. johannes signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
[PHP-WEBMASTER] Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources?
Hi! Then this fix doesn't make any sense -- you are saying if I download the .tar.gz and .zip and extract those two, I will have precisely the same sources? Should be the same sources. We shouldn't distribute anything that isn't under the respective tag as official sources, so I assume they are. Making them part of the distro may not be a bad idea too, this way they can be signed. Of course, signing one more file is 33 to 50% more work, but I think RMs can deal with it. -- Stas Malyshev smalys...@gmail.com -- PHP Webmaster List Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-WEBMASTER] Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources?
Hi! It's a worthy goal IMHO. Currently it all is done manually as you know. What! No, I didn't know. I was describing how the process used to be, and I thought it still was. I think making auto-release is a nice idea, but what about signing? I'm surely not leaving my personal private key on any commonly accessible server, so how would I sign packages? Except for that, making script that would do make release or sh scripts/release and complete the release cycle (including generating uploading everything) would be nice. Right now we have mkdist but it only takes us half-way. -- Stas Malyshev smalys...@gmail.com -- PHP Webmaster List Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-WEBMASTER] Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources?
On Mon, 2015-06-15 at 23:09 +0200, Jan Ehrhardt wrote: Is that a real problem? I always use those sources for my own Windows builds, because they are the first publicly available tarballs of a new release. They are made available by github, but no official php.net downloads. Until the release is announced the tag might be moved in case an error is detected. (sometimes for trivial stuff like CVEs in the NEWS file or merging a critical security fix) See also my reply to Christoph Becker in this thread a few minutes ago. johannes signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
[PHP-WEBMASTER] Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources?
Christoph Becker in php.internals (Tue, 16 Jun 2015 00:02:12 +0200): Have you already tried to compile an php-7.0.0alpha1.tar.* on Windows. I suppose that would fail, see http://news.php.net/php.internals/86685. It does not fail with https://github.com/php/php-src/archive/php-7.0.0alpha1.tar.gz This builds just like it should do: bison regenerates the zlp and zip files. Jan -- PHP Webmaster List Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-WEBMASTER] Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources?
Johannes Schlüter wrote: On Tue, 2015-06-16 at 00:02 +0200, Christoph Becker wrote: Why should these downloads be disabled? They contain exactly what could be checked out from the respective tag. It is not including the generated parsers. This means the user might use a different version, which might cause a bug which might be hard to debug as usage of provided files is assumed. Fair enough. However, the Windows sources neither contain the generated parser files, because they would break linking on Windows, see http://news.php.net/php.internals/86685. -- Christoph M. Becker -- PHP Webmaster List Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-WEBMASTER] Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources?
Christoph Becker in php.internals (Tue, 16 Jun 2015 00:02:12 +0200): Jan Ehrhardt wrote: Johannes Schlüter in php.internals (Mon, 15 Jun 2015 22:28:37 +0200): On Mon, 2015-06-15 at 18:41 +0200, Jan Ehrhardt wrote: On github they are next to each other: https://github.com/php/php-src/releases Those don't include the generated parsers etc. we should disable these, while I couldn't find an option for that on github's site. Why should these downloads be disabled? They contain exactly what could be checked out from the respective tag. But there is a difference from the tarballs at the downloads page: the zend_*_parser.output files are missing. And the date/time differs. The zend_*_parser.c/h files are included, but they will be regenerated by bison (on Windows at least). Jan -- PHP Webmaster List Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-WEBMASTER] Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP7 releases vs Windows Sources?
On Jun 16, 2015 1:34 AM, Hannes Magnusson . Thats what we want. We want the official release balls to be generated by an official server using the official toolchain. For the tarballs? Yes. Only that it does not happen last time I checked. There should never be a time when a Release Manager pulls up his notebook, does a checkout and packages that and uploads. Its bad enough we have this for pecl exts, but there is no reason for php-src to be playing with fire and infiltration agencies. It was the goals of snaps, but given the issues we have to keep it up, running and accessible, it does not happen. As of infiltration agencies, code signing helps. Using https (htts) helps. But you did not want it. That has unfortunately happened before, and resulted in us distributing .orig files (patch conflicts), .exp, .out, .php, ... (failed tests results) and even wrongly generated artifacts (due to wrong bison/re2c versions installed locally). Yes, we really need a standard box for that (snaps?). We don't want that happen again. The official releases should be done on snap box, and be completely automated with no room for accidents. It produces several archives, and we can add .zip to that mix if not already available. It should be obvious that any binary distribution that aims to be official PHP.net release should use this official release, not some custom mix of things. It is important that these official binaries also don't regenerate the files in the archive. If there is an extra file (.w32?), or touching of files, required to make this archive usable to generate binaries from - then please fix the root problem; touch the file before the packaging (and update the README :)). The sources zip archives have no code difference. They are a convenient archive used by many builds tools. That did not change since the last time we discussed that. -Hannes -- PHP Webmaster List Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
