On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, Derick Rethans wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, Dan Kalowsky wrote:
>
> > On Friday, June 20, 2003, at 02:53 AM, Derick Rethans wrote:
> >
> > > ? WTF has this to do with each other. Because PHP is not Linux-only,
> > > that doesn't mean we can not provide RPMs too.
> >
> > D
On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, Dan Kalowsky wrote:
> On Friday, June 20, 2003, at 02:53 AM, Derick Rethans wrote:
>
> > ? WTF has this to do with each other. Because PHP is not Linux-only,
> > that doesn't mean we can not provide RPMs too.
>
> Derick, I think the point of this is to not focus solely on R
On Friday, June 20, 2003, at 02:53 AM, Derick Rethans wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jun 2003, Ken Tossell wrote:
Roman Neuhauser wrote:
when has PHP (and/or PEAR) become Linux-only software?
It never did. That's another point against RPM.
? WTF has this to do with each other. Because PHP is not Linux-on
On Thu, 19 Jun 2003, Ken Tossell wrote:
> Roman Neuhauser wrote:
> >
> >when has PHP (and/or PEAR) become Linux-only software?
> >
> It never did. That's another point against RPM.
? WTF has this to do with each other. Because PHP is not Linux-only,
that doesn't mean we can not provide RPMs
Roman Neuhauser wrote:
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-06-18 19:39:22 -0400:
On Wed, 18 Jun 2003, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jun 2003, Marcus Börger wrote:
Why not using RPMs? Only windows is a problem, isn't it ?
Windows is the primary platform we need binaries for.
On Fri, 20 Jun 2003 01:56:41 +0200
Markus Fischer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For example mod_ssl [1] always includes the version number of
> the Apache server it works with:
>
> 21-Mar-2003: Released 2.8.14-1.3.27: Important bugfixes.
>
> So, with a quick look on the file
Hi,
On Thu, Jun 19, 2003 at 01:19:36AM +0200, Tomas V.V.Cox wrote :
[...]
> pecl package name
> -
>
> The name of the extension would be:
>
> peclfoo-bin---3.1.2-.tgz
>
> The os (Operating system) and arch (CPU type), would be the value
> returned by the OS_Guess class. STA
Hello Mika,
Thursday, June 19, 2003, 7:44:11 PM, you wrote:
MT> On Thu, 19 Jun 2003, Marcus BXrger wrote:
>> Why not using RPMs? Only windows is a problem, isn't it ?
MT> Too linux centric IMO.
I didn't mean to only support RPMs. But i don't see any reason to not
use RPMs where availa
On Thu, 19 Jun 2003, Marcus BXrger wrote:
> Why not using RPMs? Only windows is a problem, isn't it ?
Too linux centric IMO.
--
Mika Tuupola http://www.appelsiini.net/~tuupola/
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-06-18 19:39:22 -0400:
> On Wed, 18 Jun 2003, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 19 Jun 2003, Marcus Börger wrote:
> > > Why not using RPMs? Only windows is a problem, isn't it ?
> >
> > Windows is the primary platform we need binaries for.
>
> And many major Linux dis
On Thursday, June 19, 2003 8:42, Wez Furlong wrote:
> When I get a little more time (in about 2 months!) I will be completing the
> work that I started on the .MSI installer generator for PHP.
> This will generate an installer for the PHP distribution (including PEAR)
> based on the .zip binary
When I get a little more time (in about 2 months!) I will be completing the
work that I started on the .MSI installer generator for PHP.
This will generate an installer for the PHP distribution (including PEAR)
based on the .zip binary distros cooked by the snaps machine and meta data
from the sou
Hello,
On 06/18/2003 09:04 PM, Gareth Ardron wrote:
On Thursday 19 June 2003 12:39 am, Ken Tossell wrote:
Windows is the primary platform we need binaries for.
And many major Linux distributions do not support RPM...
But would that matter?
Yes, it would not matter but if you want to have a sing
On Thursday 19 June 2003 12:39 am, Ken Tossell wrote:
> >
> > Windows is the primary platform we need binaries for.
> And many major Linux distributions do not support RPM...
But would that matter?
Slackware users are used to compiling everything by hand - having only rpm's
avaliable is pretty c
On Thursday, June 19, 2003 1:26, Marcus Börger wrote:
> Hello Tomas,
> Why not using RPMs? Only windows is a problem, isn't it ?
RPM is supported too, just do a "pear makerpm ". The command
still need some work for pecl packages, but will be avaible as soon as
the binary distrib system is set.
On Wed, 18 Jun 2003, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Jun 2003, Marcus Börger wrote:
> > Why not using RPMs? Only windows is a problem, isn't it ?
>
> Windows is the primary platform we need binaries for.
And many major Linux distributions do not support RPM...
--
Ken Tossell
ken at tossell
On Thu, 19 Jun 2003, Marcus Börger wrote:
> Why not using RPMs? Only windows is a problem, isn't it ?
Windows is the primary platform we need binaries for.
-Rasmus
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Hello Tomas,
Why not using RPMs? Only windows is a problem, isn't it ?
regards
marcus
Thursday, June 19, 2003, 1:19:36 AM, you wrote:
TVVC> What about to start discussing about managment of binary pecl
TVVC> packages?
TVVC> I'm not the best person for listing the requirements, but here are s
What about to start discussing about managment of binary pecl
packages?
I'm not the best person for listing the requirements, but here are some
ideas:
pecl package name
-
The name of the extension would be:
peclfoo-bin---3.1.2-.tgz
The os (Operating system) and arch (CPU type)
19 matches
Mail list logo
