On 01/03/15 00:37, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote:
Yes, the global vs local setting issue is distinct from the question of
is phar://blah a URL?
I think your question is about remote/local resource.
Is phar:// local resource? It's yes.
Is phar:// URL/URI? I think it depends how people understand
Hi Stas,
On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 1:53 PM, Stanislav Malyshev smalys...@gmail.com
wrote:
I have no intention to change current include/require syntax, except
adding
2nd parameter.
This is a bit misleading since include is not a function, so there's no
1st parameter. Instead, it's a syntax
Hi Rowan,
On Sun, Mar 1, 2015 at 3:46 AM, Rowan Collins rowan.coll...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 28/02/2015 02:37, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote:
Hi Rowan,
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 8:25 PM, Rowan Collins rowan.coll...@gmail.com
wrote:
Yasuo Ohgaki wrote on 27/02/2015 03:44:
Hi all,
This is RFC for
On 28/02/2015 02:37, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote:
Hi Rowan,
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 8:25 PM, Rowan Collins
rowan.coll...@gmail.com mailto:rowan.coll...@gmail.com wrote:
Yasuo Ohgaki wrote on 27/02/2015 03:44:
Hi all,
This is RFC for removing allow_url_include INI option. [1]
Hi!
The root cause of the issue here is preciseness of the setting.
I think you agree that current allow_url_include=Off with INI_SYSTEM is
not precise at all.
It is precise - it's doing exactly what it meant to do, separate local
wrappers from remote ones.
We need to consider local and
Hi all,
On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Yasuo Ohgaki yohg...@ohgaki.net wrote:
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 8:25 PM, Rowan Collins rowan.coll...@gmail.com
wrote:
Yasuo Ohgaki wrote on 27/02/2015 03:44:
Hi all,
This is RFC for removing allow_url_include INI option. [1]
During Script only
Hi Rowan,
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 8:25 PM, Rowan Collins rowan.coll...@gmail.com
wrote:
Yasuo Ohgaki wrote on 27/02/2015 03:44:
Hi all,
This is RFC for removing allow_url_include INI option. [1]
During Script only include RFC[2] discussion, stream wrapper issue is
raised.
I was thinking
Hi!
I have no intention to change current include/require syntax, except adding
2nd parameter.
This is a bit misleading since include is not a function, so there's no
1st parameter. Instead, it's a syntax construct. Of course, syntax
construct's grammar can be changed, though I'm not sure if
Hi Xinchen,
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 4:45 PM, Xinchen Hui larue...@php.net wrote:
Sorry, but I am confused by the point, do you want to disable include
a remote php file or not?
if yes, how about with allow_url_fopen?
eval(file_get_contents(http://xx/));
thanks
My objective is to
Hi Xinchen,
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 4:45 PM, Xinchen Hui larue...@php.net wrote:
Sorry, but I am confused by the point, do you want to disable include
a remote php file or not?
I think the RFC title was misleading. I've changed to
Precise URL include control
Thank you for your feedback.
Yasuo Ohgaki wrote on 27/02/2015 03:44:
Hi all,
This is RFC for removing allow_url_include INI option. [1]
During Script only include RFC[2] discussion, stream wrapper issue is
raised.
I was thinking this issue as a separate issue, but it seems others are not.
I'm not convinced by the
Hey:
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 11:44 AM, Yasuo Ohgaki yohg...@ohgaki.net wrote:
Hi all,
This is RFC for removing allow_url_include INI option. [1]
During Script only include RFC[2] discussion, stream wrapper issue is
raised.
I was thinking this issue as a separate issue, but it seems others
Hi Xinchen,
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 3:55 PM, Xinchen Hui larue...@php.net wrote:
hmm, does that means, if this RFC won't pass, then script only include
RFC should also be rejected?
if yes, then maybe you should put them together?
Sorry I just sent previous mail before your mail.
We need
Hey:
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 2:59 PM, Yasuo Ohgaki yohg...@ohgaki.net wrote:
Hi Xinchen,
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 3:55 PM, Xinchen Hui larue...@php.net wrote:
hmm, does that means, if this RFC won't pass, then script only include
RFC should also be rejected?
if yes, then maybe you should
Hi all,
This is RFC for removing allow_url_include INI option. [1]
During Script only include RFC[2] discussion, stream wrapper issue is
raised.
I was thinking this issue as a separate issue, but it seems others are not.
Script only include RFC does not cover stream wrapper hole. This RFC
15 matches
Mail list logo
