Hi Greg,
I must be going crazy. Is there an actual problem that needs solving?
Yep, solved yesterday.
You're saying that a user who improperly installs php_openssl.dll (i.e.
does not follow instructions and set up ssleay.dll and libeay.dll) should
magically be able to use phar with
On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 2:46 AM, Greg Beaver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I must be going crazy. Is there an actual problem that needs solving?
You're saying that a user who improperly installs php_openssl.dll (i.e.
does not follow instructions and set up ssleay.dll and libeay.dll) should
Pierre,
I must be going crazy. Is there an actual problem that needs solving?
You're saying that a user who improperly installs php_openssl.dll (i.e.
does not follow instructions and set up ssleay.dll and libeay.dll) should
magically be able to use phar with openssl? Why?
You are not
Hi,
Please top to make easy problems an endless pain please. And stop to
mix every topics you can think about in every single discussions.
Also it would be nice if you get cooler and stop to harass me on every
single reply or commit, get a life, do something, whatever helps but
stop to harass
Hi Pierre,
--with-openssl is used by ext/openssl and will continue to be used
like it is now (I'm thinking of adding --with-openssl-dir for
consistency but that's all).
This has absolutely no bearing on my question. Perhaps I expressed myself
badly.
- Steph
--
PHP Internals - PHP
Hi Martin,
Would --with-openssl imply --enable-phar-ssl then? Sounds like a good
idea to me.
It certainly could... but what about distro builds?
- Steph
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Hi Pierre,
OK, I got back to the rest of your email now (caffeine always helps, eh).
I'm not sure it makes sense to have the ssl optional features enabled
but not ext/openssl. Or to say it better, I don't see the gain. What
is the gain besides being able to say: heh you can use the ssl
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 1:28 PM, Steph Fox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You're missing that Windows users don't tend to roll their own PHP. They
tend to pick and choose their extensions.
I still miss your point here, I was only talking about bins releases
for windows.
At present, if someone
Hey Pierre,
--enable-phar-ssl and do (not tested but it gives the idea):
if (PHP_PHAR_SSL == yes) {
ADD_EXTENSION_DEP(phar, openssl, true);
} else {
Erm... no, you've definitely missed the point. ADD_EXTENSION_DEP() only
works in one of the four possible scenarios, and that one is
Hi,
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 4:38 PM, Steph Fox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We can sign and verify OpenSSL signatures without ext/openssl if we have the
library dependency. In other words, this (with the module checks in util.c
commented out) works fine:
I finally took a look at why phar is not
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 5:44 PM, Steph Fox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My main question now is why don't you actually reflect the (optional)
dependencies? bz2 and zlib compression available will not be available
if bz2 or zlib is not present, same for openssl.
What do you mean? In config.w32?
if (!PHAR_G(has_zlib)) ...
Pierre, you'd still need to test for them at runtime whether they were
listed as a soft dependency or not!
- Steph
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 7:21 PM, Steph Fox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
if (!PHAR_G(has_zlib)) ...
Pierre, you'd still need to test for them at runtime whether they were
listed as a soft dependency or not!
No, not if they are not soft dependencies, this is what is done in 99%
of the php exts
Steph Fox wrote:
Hi Pierre,
OK, I got back to the rest of your email now (caffeine always helps, eh).
I'm not sure it makes sense to have the ssl optional features enabled
but not ext/openssl. Or to say it better, I don't see the gain. What
is the gain besides being able to say: heh you can
Pierre Joye wrote:
As testing has_xxx at runtime looks shiny and powerful, I don't think
it is worth the pain.
What pain?
Greg
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Hi Greg, all,
It seems we don't use the openssl extension API at all in ext/phar, just the
actual OpenSSL headers and libs. That means Phar with OpenSSL support can be
both built and run without ext/openssl being built at all, but requires
third-party libs (under Windows at least -
On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 10:32 PM, Steph Fox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It seems we don't use the openssl extension API at all in ext/phar, just the
actual OpenSSL headers and libs. That means Phar with OpenSSL support can be
both built and run without ext/openssl being built at all, but requires
On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 10:32 PM, Steph Fox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It seems we don't use the openssl extension API at all in ext/phar, just the
actual OpenSSL headers and libs. That means Phar with OpenSSL support can be
both built and run without ext/openssl being built at all, but requires
18 matches
Mail list logo
