Kris Craig wrote:
Ok, I've updated the RFC based on input received here. I also made a
decision on the APXS vs. APXS2 question; please refer to the RFC for
details. If anybody has any objections to this decision, now would be the
time to say something!
I've targetted this for 5.4.1 so this
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 2:27 AM, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com wrote:
Ok, I've updated the RFC based on input received here. I also made a
decision on the APXS vs. APXS2 question; please refer to the RFC for
details. If anybody has any objections to this decision, now would be the
time to
On Fri, February 24, 2012 6:14 pm, Kris Craig wrote:
No, it happens and it's even clearly documented in APXS.
Basically, if you specify the -a option in APXS, it overwrites your
httpd.conf (or apache.conf or whatever it is on your system) and adds
the
LoadModule line to it. In PHP's
@Richard I think, briefly, something like that was implemented. However,
it was reverted soon after because it changed the default behavior of
configure. This was discovered to be a problem after people realized that,
if -a is not specified, APXS will not only skip writing the LoadModule
line,
Kris Craig wrote:
@Lester Generally, this is a problem that surfaces in manual PHP builds.
You're correct in that the packaged repos tend to handle all that stuff for
you anyway. However, these repos are rarely updated (I think CentOS and
Ubuntu are both still stuck on 5.1), so it's often
@Lester Generally, this is a problem that surfaces in manual PHP builds.
You're correct in that the packaged repos tend to handle all that stuff for
you anyway. However, these repos are rarely updated (I think CentOS and
Ubuntu are both still stuck on 5.1), so it's often necessary to build
I've got a CentOS 5.7 VM running at work and the PHP package returned by
yum is 5.1.6. Don't have my Ubuntu box with me at the moment but I'm
pretty sure it's 5.1.x as well.
You probably have rpmforge or CentALT enabled and that's where it's pulling
the newer build. But even then, the latest
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 11:16 PM, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com wrote:
I've got a CentOS 5.7 VM running at work and the PHP package returned by
yum is 5.1.6. Don't have my Ubuntu box with me at the moment but I'm
pretty sure it's 5.1.x as well.
You probably have rpmforge or CentALT
Yes but you have to download those RPM's manually. If you just use the
default repo (i.e. yum install php) as most sysadmins do, you're gonna
get something MUCH older than that. Plus there are still occasions where a
manual build is preferable to using an RPM.
--Kris
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at
No, you don't. Since CentOS 5.6, PHP 5.3 is part of the base
repository. You are right, yum install php installs 5.1, but you
don't have to download anything to install 5.3, just type yum install
php53.
Gergo Erdosi
On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 12:06 AM, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes
Hmm didn't know that. I stand corrected!
That being said, unless we're talking about dropping the configure script
altogether in favor of reliance on RPM's and repos, this RFC is still a
no-brainer. =)
--Kris
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 3:56 PM, Gergo Erdosi ge...@gergoerdosi.com wrote:
No,
Are there any final thoughts, objections, last-minute change requests,
etc? Looks like we're all pretty much in agreement so I'll initiate the
vote if I don't hear anything.
--Kris
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 4:06 PM, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com wrote:
Hmm didn't know that. I stand
Ok, I've updated the RFC based on input received here. I also made a
decision on the APXS vs. APXS2 question; please refer to the RFC for
details. If anybody has any objections to this decision, now would be the
time to say something!
I've targetted this for 5.4.1 so this won't have any bearing
Any further thoughts on this?
--Kris
On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 5:36 PM, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com wrote:
@Johannes Agreed. That was one of the reasons I decided to make the
existing behavior (i.e. -a) the default.
I haven't independently confirmed that issue in APXS but I have heard
On Mon, February 20, 2012 7:02 pm, Kris Craig wrote:
Opening discussion on RFC pertaining to adding a new option to the
configure script with regard to how/whether APXS touches the
httpd.conf
file.
This is my first RFC post so please go easy on me if I screwed-up on
procedure in any way.
Thanks for the input! You're right, I'll go ahead and clarify that in the
RFC.
I'll probably initiate voting on Monday unless something changes between
now and then.
--Kris
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 2:24 PM, Richard Lynch c...@l-i-e.com wrote:
On Mon, February 20, 2012 7:02 pm, Kris Craig
On 02/24/2012 02:38 PM, Kris Craig wrote:
Thanks for the input! You're right, I'll go ahead and clarify that in the
RFC.
I'll probably initiate voting on Monday unless something changes between
now and then.
--Kris
Re https://wiki.php.net/rfc/apxs-loadmodule
The RFC needs more work
On 02/24/2012 02:38 PM, Kris Craig wrote:
Thanks for the input! You're right, I'll go ahead and clarify that in the
RFC.
I'll probably initiate voting on Monday unless something changes between
now and then.
--Kris
The real issue with the PHP install is that it doesn't add AddType
or
Yeah since we pretty much rely on APXS to do the httpd.conf stuff, we're
really limited in terms of what we can do. That is, unless we want to
start manually doing this in the configure script in lieu of APXS, though
I'm not sure that would be worth the trouble and the overhead.
LoadModule
On 02/24/2012 03:54 PM, Kris Craig wrote:
LoadModule clashes still happen in the current releases. I haven't
tested it on 5.5-dev but it definitely exists on 5.3.x. I have yet
to test it on 5.4 but I'm not aware of any changes there that
would've affected this. So this is an existing
No, it happens and it's even clearly documented in APXS.
Basically, if you specify the -a option in APXS, it overwrites your
httpd.conf (or apache.conf or whatever it is on your system) and adds the
LoadModule line to it. In PHP's configure script, you'll notice that -a
is always specified;
On 02/24/2012 04:14 PM, Kris Craig wrote:
No, it happens and it's even clearly documented in APXS.
Basically, if you specify the -a option in APXS, it overwrites your
httpd.conf (or apache.conf or whatever it is on your system) and adds the
LoadModule line to it. In PHP's configure script,
Oh ok, I think I see where you're getting confused.
This problem occurs when your LoadModule statement is in a *separate* .conf
file; i.e. using the Include statement. APXS cannot detect this and just
sticks a LoadModule into the main .conf file. This is what causes the
duplication. It's a
Opening discussion on RFC pertaining to adding a new option to the
configure script with regard to how/whether APXS touches the httpd.conf
file.
This is my first RFC post so please go easy on me if I screwed-up on
procedure in any way. =)
Here it is: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/apxs-loadmodule
Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com writes:
Opening discussion on RFC pertaining to adding a new option to the
configure script with regard to how/whether APXS touches the httpd.conf
file.
This is my first RFC post so please go easy on me if I screwed-up on
procedure in any way. =)
Here it
Hi,
On Mon, 2012-02-20 at 17:02 -0800, Kris Craig wrote:
Opening discussion on RFC pertaining to adding a new option to the
configure script with regard to how/whether APXS touches the httpd.conf
file.
This is my first RFC post so please go easy on me if I screwed-up on
procedure in any
@Johannes Agreed. That was one of the reasons I decided to make the
existing behavior (i.e. -a) the default.
I haven't independently confirmed that issue in APXS but I have heard it
mentioned before; I'll test it myself when I get home just to make sure,
since the APXS docs are a bit vague on
27 matches
Mail list logo
