On Mon, 2013-08-19 at 14:12 -0400, J David wrote: > On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 9:15 PM, Sara Golemon <poll...@php.net> wrote: > > Right, gotcha. I think ideally someone should put in the grunt work to do > > what you suggested: Build libphp5.so all the time, then link up > > php/mod_php5.so/etc... against that as a shared system library (which in > > turn other programs or SAPIs could link against). > > > > I'm not sure if anyone has the time and patience to do that (for its > > relatively small return), but it'd get my vote. > > That is something I would volunteer to undertake (including RFC, etc), > but in order to do so in a productive way, someone else would have to > volunteer to do the Windows portion of the work. That's well beyond > my knowledge, ability, and available development hardware. :( > > The big preliminary question for me would be, "Is there a specific > design reason why it isn't currently done this way?" PHP already > requires shlib's that depend on shlib's, so that functionality is > probably universally available, but I can't shake the suspicion that > maybe there is some has-to-be-supported platform or use case hiding at > the periphery that requires static linking. (Which could > hypothetically be addressed with a libphp5.a, but that isn't something > I've looked into at all.)
On Windows we do this already. We have php.exe apache dlls with the SAPI and then php5[ts].dll. For Unix I'm not sure it is good - it makes it complex to run multiple PHP versions next to each other which is not only relevant for developers but also hosters offering multiple versions. johannes -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
