On 11/13/07, Stanislav Malyshev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > What I was trying to say was that it would be a good idea to make > > third party lib collections for the various VC versions and make them > > available for building. It would give us a way to test both the build > > Well, that would be useful, but I think that's a different subject. And > I'm not sure we want to deal with "various CRTs" - we want to deal only > with one additional, it'd be enough trouble I believe :) So, we want to > have 3rd party libs built with recent VC, but we also want the whole PHP > build with it.
When I wrote that initially, I was responding to the thread as a whole, and in the course of this thread there have been five separate VS versions mentioned. However I think it would be a good thing to have more than one 'alternative' set of libraries on the go, purely for development/research purposes initially. There was talk of the upcoming MS compiler release, for example. Wouldn't it be smart to have the ability to test new compiler versions as they come up? It would mean keeping a copy of the source for all the third party libs used with PHP, but if we're going to provide two sets of those binaries anyway we'll already have that. Because long after VS 2005 becomes our 'norm', there's every chance that we'll be keeping VC 6 libs somewhere public so that people who still need them can get hold of them to build PHP against. Not forever, sure, but I'd say at least another five years before we can safely call it fully obsolete. > > I do think it's important to have a single official build. The thought > > of having to explain 'C runtime' to every PHP newb just gives me the > > willies... > > I think it's very unfortunate that Microsoft was unable to make the > transition smooth, s/unfortunate/deliberate, but then I'm a cynic but we can't keep with vc6 forever, and I don't see > what happens in the future that would make the transition better than it > is now. I think what is highly likely to happen over the next two years that will change the situation is that XP usage will drop dramatically. This year, though, you can still buy brand new machines with XP installed, and that's without ticking any 'special option'. Companies might be able to afford the latest hardware, but individuals will generally use the same box for years on end - and when it comes to Windows, you can read 'the same operating system' for 'the same box'. I don't see how it's justifiable to aim a distribution at the high end of the market and still claim one of PHP's 'selling points' as being that it can run on your toaster. And I've very strong objections to php.net shipping MS C runtime libraries to make good our (implied) promise. It's one thing to offer support for a platform, but entirely another to tie our software to a third-party library that effectively upgrades that platform. It also ties us - and all PHP/Windows users - irrevocably to the MS development schedule. Last time the 'kill the .dsp files' discussion arose, I argued vehemently against it. I wouldn't argue against that now, because it's no longer the case that they're a reliable industry standard. Things change, but not very fast - and not always predictably either. - Steph > -- > Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Software Architect > [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.zend.com/ > (408)253-8829 MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- > 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
