Re: [PHP-DEV] Moderate PHP-DEV
We don't lose anything by giving the first two items some time to prove their usefullness. On the other hand, it is very likely that we will lose useful input, if we implement the third item prematurely. I disagree. Anyone here can handle replying because we already have the anti-spam protection. The only thing we're doing is adding to the message an explanation of the post ethics. I wouldn't call this drastic at all. I am not overly confident that the system works though. The problem right now is that we have not been in any way tracking peoples' failed attempts to send something to the addresses currently protected by the system. It is only when a clueful person, like Dirk recently, persisted and emailed me privately with the 3 messages he had tried dilligently to get to us but ultimately failed, that we get a hint that something along the way didn't work. I have no idea if the problem was on our end or on Dirk's end. Dirk knows what the hell he is doing and he said he turned off any spam-catching filters and whatever else might have prevented him from getting the confirmation email he was supposed to reply to in order to verify his emails. Whatever the reason, the system didn't work for him, and who knows how many others it has failed for as well. Dirk was listed in the 'pending' stage meaning supposedly a confirmation email had been sent, but he said he never got it. There are many other addresses listed as pending. I'd like to get a better idea of what happened to Dirk's confirmation email and also whether the other people on the list received such an email. If we are going to deploy this on a much wider scale, before doing so someone has to volunteer to track how it is working currently so we have a sense of whether it works at all and under which circumstances it falls over. Blindly enabling what may or may not be a shaky solution on something as important as php-dev is a very bad idea. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] compiling PHP_4_3
Did you actually check out version 4.3? cvs co -r PHP_4_3 php4 Check your CVS/Entries file. You should see the branch name after each file. -Rasmus On Thu, 13 Mar 2003, Corne' Cornelius wrote: Hi, I compiled CLI version of PHP_4_3 this morning and it gave the following: php4/main/main.c:225: undefined reference to `zend_disable_class' php4/main/main.c:239: undefined reference to `zend_disable_class' Is this right ? won't PHP_4_3 compile with Zend version 1 anymore ? Corne' !Exclude Disclaimer! -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] CVS access
Unless I am missing something, I don't see how this stuff belongs in PHP CVS at all. Could you explain why you think this needs to be in the core language CVS? -Rasmus On Mon, 10 Mar 2003, [iso-8859-2] Jn uavec wrote: I need CVS access into PHP CVS repository. I have project with code name DotPHP. See CVS repository in http://sourceforge. net/projects/webcomp. I want add this directory into PHP directory... Akelavlk == REKLAMA = Vyrazne zlavy pocitacov a prislusenstva Toshiba Pocket PC e740 v cench u? od 24.300,- Sk bez DPH Navstivte nas na adrese http://www.somi.sk/akcie.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Language Auto Detection / www.php.net
What browser denies you from setting this accept-language thing? You do have control over it, and it is far more general then having a cookie in the browser. Which is also not that flexible, as we would probably only store one language code. Gabor, the problem is that you can't override it. If you are unlucky enough to be speaking a language for which the PHP documentation is crappy, but you still want to set your accept-language to that language for use on other sites, then you are out of luck on php.net. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP Lists not hiding email address
On Tue, 11 Mar 2003, Ryan wrote: Hi, I'm getting a lot of spam leading from some of the pages on zend.com/lists/php-dev/ The bug edit pages hide the email address. But the static archives like http://www.zend.com/lists/php-dev/200110/msg02161.html don't hide them. Could you fix this? Why in the world are you posting this to php-dev? That is a matter for [EMAIL PROTECTED] and has nothing to do with the PHP project. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: #22527 [Opn-Bgs]: Modulus returned negative value
Well, Perl can lean the other way as well actually. Try this: use integer; print -27%7; You will see it gives you -6. Like I said, it comes down to which way you truncate. Programmers tend to think that something like (int)(-3.4) should result in -3. If that is what you expect, then I think you also have to expect -27%7 to return -6. -Rasmus On Tue, 4 Mar 2003, George Schlossnagle wrote: Interesting. I don't know what the ISO standard say, but mathematically a a % b will always return you an integer 0 = a%b b (since there are no negative numbers in canonical representation of Z/bZ). I guess perl/python/tcl ddecided to adhere to the mathematical definition. On Tuesday, March 4, 2003, at 02:37 AM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: This is actually an interesting question. Should we be truncating towards zero? I'd say yes, but then I tested Perl, Python and Tcl, and they all say that -27 % 7 is 1 which means they truncate towards negative infinity. -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: #22527 [Opn-Bgs]: Modulus returned negative value
On Tue, 4 Mar 2003, Sascha Schumann wrote: Well, Perl can lean the other way as well actually. Try this: Is there some documentation why the default is as it is? All I could find was this description of the Perl modulus operator: Binary ``%'' computes the modulus of two numbers. Given integer operands $a and $b: If $b is positive, then $a % $b is $a minus the largest multiple of $b that is not greater than $a. If $b is negative, then $a % $b is $a minus the smallest multiple of $b that is not less than $a (i.e. the result will be less than or equal to zero). Note than when use integer is in scope, ``%'' give you direct access to the modulus operator as implemented by your C compiler. This operator is not as well defined for negative operands, but it will execute faster. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] Re: #22527 [Opn-Bgs]: Modulus returned negative value
This is actually an interesting question. Should we be truncating towards
zero? I'd say yes, but then I tested Perl, Python and Tcl, and they all
say that -27 % 7 is 1 which means they truncate towards negative infinity.
Too late to change at this point in the game, but perhaps it calls for a
modulus() function which leans the other way?
-Rasmus
On Mon, 4 Mar 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ID: 22527
Updated by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reported By: jaypedhskr at aol dot com
-Status: Open
+Status: Bogus
Bug Type: Math related
Operating System: Unix
PHP Version: 4.2.3
New Comment:
Modulus has never been well-defined for negative values in computer
languages. It all comes down to whether the language truncates towards
zero or towards negative infinity. Computers have traditionally
truncated towards zero, whereas mathematicians tend to truncate towards
negative infinity. Some languages like Fortran and Ada actually have
two different modulus operators for this reason. PHP just has one, and
it truncates towards zero as has been the traditional and expected
thing for programming languages to do.
So, given that, let's look at your numbers. Modulus has to satisfy the
relation: (a/b)*b + a%b = a
where a/b is an integer division where our truncation direction comes
in.
(-27/7) * 7 + -27%7 = -27
( -3 ) * 7 + -27%7 = -27
-21 + -27%7 = -27
-27%7 = -27+21
-27%7 = -6
In fact, the ISO standard for the C programming language, in which PHP
is written, defines integer division and modulus operators to perform
truncation towards 0 and not towards negative infinity. We don't
really have a strict language definition for PHP, but if we did, we
would most likely follow the lead of languages like Fortran, C and C++
and specify truncation towards zero to be as consistent as possible
with other languages.
Previous Comments:
[2003-03-03 22:29:46] jaypedhskr at aol dot com
Hi,
I had the following result from a PHP script, as seen from printing
output variables:
-27 % 7 == -6
My understanding of the modulus function is that it returns the
remainder from division, and that the remainder can never be negative.
I believe that is the standard mathematical definition.
So I think what should have been returned is 1 instead of -6.
That is
-27 = 7*(-4) + 1
instead of
-27 = 7*(-3) -6
I got around this by adding the the modulus value if the result was
less than zero. But I think a result of less than zero shouldn't
occur.
Code snippet that ran into this:
$T5 = $D + $T1 + $Y + $T2 + $T3 - $T4;
$weekday = $T5 % 7;
Added code to handle this:
if ($weekday 0) {
$weekday += 7; // -27 % 7 = -6 case
}
Specific problem case:
$T5 = 3 + 2 + 3 + 5 + 0 - 40; // -27
$weekday = %T5 % 7; // -27 % 7 = -6
Thanks!
-Jay Pedersen
--
Edit this bug report at http://bugs.php.net/?id=22527edit=1
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] magic_quotes on the environment?
I'm not convinced that escaping environment data is the correct thing to do in the first place, and I would like to change php to not escape env vars if magic_quotes_gpc is on. Any opinions on this? This changed somewhere along the line then. Originally magic quotes only touched GPC data. I never noticed it also did it to the environment and I'd consider that to be a bug. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP] 'make' PHP4.3.1 returns the use of function`tempnam' isdangerous --- WHY?
When I tried to 'make' PHP-4.3.1, it returns warning message and died. I am using RH8.0 + Apache 2.0.44 It didn't die, that is simply the end of the build. Warnings aren't fatal. (Please do not cc all the lists) -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Tie'ing variables
Analyzing PHP's routines a bit, it seems that the slowest part of a generic request is populating the special arrays, $_ENV, $_GET, etc. Do you have any profiling evidence of this? Everything I have looked at points squarely at the parts of PHP that requires a system call. Reducing system calls gives you a lot more bang for the buck than optimizing elsewhere. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] [PATCH] - fix for 64 bit issues with OnUpdateInt
On Fri, 28 Feb 2003, Andi Gutmans wrote: At 04:50 PM 2/28/2003 +0100, Sascha Schumann wrote: I think that simply adding OnUpdateLong and deprecating OnUpdateInt is fine while retaining its current semantics. I just don't see any value in changing the meaning of OnUpdateInt; at least that's how I interpreted Andi's message. That's also an option but I think OnUpdateInt() is confusing and how do we stop ppl from using it in new extensions which who's commit messages aren't followed via php-cvs? You can't really, but at least their extensions won't compile in future PHP versions and they will be forced to go and address the issue as opposed to continuing to propogate extensions that aren't 64-bit friendly. If we could force a compiler warning/error on a type mismatch to the OnUpdateInt/Long then that might be a solution too. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] New extension: netfilter
On Fri, 28 Feb 2003, Corne' Cornelius wrote: Can i code a netfilter extension for PHP or don't you guys see the need for it ? It could result in some great firewall frontends in PHP Go for it. Assuming the netfilter library is not under the GPL. LGPL is fine. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] Flex never-interactive mode
I think we can add %option never-interactive to the ini-scanner lexer to speed it up a tiny little bit. Speeding up the ini scanner might be important for the folks running the cgi version. More importantly, to me anyway, when we know we are not interactive, should we not programmatically set is_interactive to false for the language scanner as well? I did this here and the ioctl syscalls that come from the isatty() calls in the lexer dropped away speeding things up nicely. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Flex never-interactive mode
On Wed, 26 Feb 2003, Andi Gutmans wrote: At 12:48 PM 2/26/2003 -0800, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: I think we can add %option never-interactive to the ini-scanner lexer to speed it up a tiny little bit. Speeding up the ini scanner might be important for the folks running the cgi version. More importantly, to me anyway, when we know we are not interactive, should we not programmatically set is_interactive to false for the language scanner as well? I did this here and the ioctl syscalls that come from the isatty() calls in the lexer dropped away speeding things up nicely. Do you have any figures? (req/s wise) I think we can set it to false when we know we're not interactive. It shouldn't be a problem. Not really. I've hacked and slashed a bunch of things and this is just one of them. I could pull out just this change and try to time it, I guess. But it can't help but be faster just by looking at the syscall profiles before and after the change. On a simple Hello World script before the change you have this: (PHP 4.2 with realpath turned off) 83757 apache 0.10 CALL __getcwd(0x9fbfe674,0xfff) 83757 apache 0.10 RET __getcwd 0 83757 apache 0.10 CALL chdir(0x9fbfe614) 83757 apache 0.30 RET chdir 0 83757 apache 0.23 CALL open(0x167588,0,0x1b6) 83757 apache 0.31 RET open 5 83757 apache 0.09 CALL __getcwd(0x9fbfdc14,0x400) 83757 apache 0.32 RET __getcwd 0 83757 apache 0.31 CALL ioctl(0x5,TIOCGETA,0x9fbfe4e4) 83757 apache 0.10 RET ioctl -1 errno 25 Inappropriate ioctl for device 83757 apache 0.34 CALL fstat(0x5,0x9fbfd42c) 83757 apache 0.10 RET fstat 0 83757 apache 0.08 CALL read(0x5,0x148000,0x2000) 83757 apache 0.23 RET read 42/0x2a 83757 apache 0.08 CALL read(0x5,0x148000,0x2000) 83757 apache 0.13 RET read 0 83757 apache 0.46 CALL ioctl(0x5,TIOCGETA,0x9fbfd4c0) 83757 apache 0.09 RET ioctl -1 errno 25 Inappropriate ioctl for device 83757 apache 0.20 CALL close(0x5) 83757 apache 0.10 RET close 0 83757 apache 0.53 CALL setitimer(0,0x9fbfe29c,0x9fbfe28c) 83757 apache 0.14 RET setitimer 0 83757 apache 0.59 CALL setitimer(0,0x9fbfe29c,0x9fbfe28c) 83757 apache 0.09 RET setitimer 0 83757 apache 0.26 CALL chdir(0x9fbfe674) 83757 apache 0.30 RET chdir 0 The 3rd column there is the time it took for the call. A failed ioctl is one of the heavier syscalls and both of the ioctls disappear for this request when you turn off is_interactive. The ioctls are the same in 4.3. Here is what I am currently down to in 4.3. I still need to get rid of that one lseek and am hoping to nuke the fstat as well. I also need to figure out why setitimer is being called more in 4.3 than it was in 4.2. 88046 apache 0.09 CALL __getcwd(0x9fbfe654,0xfff) 88046 apache 0.13 RET __getcwd 0 88046 apache 0.09 CALL chdir(0x9fbfe5f4) 88046 apache 0.32 RET chdir 0 88046 apache 0.10 CALL setitimer(0x2,0x9fbfe63c,0) 88046 apache 0.08 RET setitimer 0 88046 apache 0.08 CALL setitimer(0x2,0x9fbfe61c,0) 88046 apache 0.06 RET setitimer 0 88046 apache 0.28 CALL sigaction(0x1b,0x9fbfe5b4,0x9fbfe59c) 88046 apache 0.08 RET sigaction 0 88046 apache 0.07 CALL sigprocmask(0x2,0x9fbfe60c,0) 88046 apache 0.06 RET sigprocmask 0 88046 apache 0.30 CALL open(0x12ce0c,0,0x1b6) 88046 apache 0.33 RET open 5 88046 apache 0.21 CALL lseek(0x5,0,0,0,0) 88046 apache 0.08 RET lseek 0 88046 apache 0.43 CALL fstat(0x5,0x9fbfd40c) 88046 apache 0.13 RET fstat 0 88046 apache 0.09 CALL read(0x5,0x13f000,0x2000) 88046 apache 0.22 RET read 42/0x2a 88046 apache 0.06 CALL read(0x5,0x13f000,0x2000) 88046 apache 0.15 RET read 0 88046 apache 0.66 CALL close(0x5) 88046 apache 0.15 RET close 0 88046 apache 0.47 CALL setitimer(0,0x9fbfdf7c,0x9fbfdf6c) 88046 apache 0.12 RET setitimer 0 88046 apache 0.43 CALL setitimer(0,0x9fbfdf7c,0x9fbfdf6c) 88046 apache 0.09 RET setitimer 0 88046 apache 0.21 CALL chdir(0x9fbfe654) 88046 apache 0.31 RET chdir 0 -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Performance degradation part 2 the module version
Admittedly, when opening the file for the first time, we do not need to seek - so we can avoid it by passing a flag (OR'd with the REPORT_ERRORS flag). I'm sure we can eliminate those seeks. Are there any other areas in the streams code that you can see that could do with a syscall tune-up? Those are the only ones I have seen so far that stood out as being extraneous. I think we should do our best to add whatever shortcuts are necessary to ensure the most common execution path is as fast as we can possibly get it. If it takes getting a little ugly passing in flags, so be it. I'd like to get 4.3 up to the same level as 4.2. I still need to hack and slash away code for Yahoo! on top of that since syscall thrashing is our limiting factor at this point. There is other ugliness hiding in there. For example, include_once on a file that has already been included will still stat() (many times) and open() the file. Only later on does it go and check the included_list to see if it should actually have done that. Not quite on the primary execution path, but still. If you have a case where that scenario happens a lot, it is actually mesurably faster to do manual multiple include prevention with a PHP-level flag. The _once stuff was added distinctly to prevent that kind of ugly code, but we stuffed it up. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Performance degradation part 2 the module version
I'm sure we can eliminate those seeks. Are there any other areas in the
streams code that you can see that could do with a syscall tune-up?
Ok, found two more. In _php_stream_fopen() we fstat() the script to be
opened:
realpath = expand_filepath(filename, NULL TSRMLS_CC);
fp = fopen(realpath, mode);
if (fp) {
/* sanity checks for include/require */
if (options STREAM_OPEN_FOR_INCLUDE (fstat(fileno(fp), st) == -1 ||
!S_ISREG(st.st_mode))) {
#ifdef PHP_WIN32
/* skip the sanity check; fstat doesn't appear to work on
* UNC paths */
if (!IS_UNC_PATH(filename, strlen(filename)))
#endif
goto err;
}
ret = php_stream_fopen_from_file_rel(fp, mode);
That sequence of code is a trainwreck. The expand_filepath() ends up
doing an lstat() on every component of the path and then the file itself,
and then we fstat() the file. I can't afford the realpath() here, so I
turn it off in expand_filepath(), but I don't think the fstat() is needed
there.
Then right after that in _php_stream_fopen_from_file() we have:
#ifdef S_ISFIFO
/* detect if this is a pipe */
if (self-fd = 0) {
struct stat sb;
self-is_pipe = (fstat(self-fd, sb) == 0 S_ISFIFO(sb.st_mode)) ? 1 : 0;
}
#endif
which does yet another fstat() on the file. At the very least, this one
should use the result of the previous one. Basically if these checks are
still needed, we need a stat cache here.
There is a 3rd fstat() after that, but I can't really make any sense of
the backtrace to it:
#0 0x202d0c58 in fstat () from /usr/lib/libc.so.4
#1 0x202e42e6 in __swhatbuf () from /usr/lib/libc.so.4
#2 0x202e4236 in __smakebuf () from /usr/lib/libc.so.4
#3 0x202d454f in __srefill () from /usr/lib/libc.so.4
#4 0x202b3ea6 in fread () from /usr/lib/libc.so.4
#5 0x203f9bb4 in yy_get_next_buffer () at Zend/zend_language_scanner.c:5359
#6 0x203f98cd in lex_scan (zendlval=0x9fbfd770) at Zend/zend_language_scanner.c:5193
#7 0x20401814 in zendlex (zendlval=0x9fbfd76c) at
/homes/rasmus/php4/Zend/zend_compile.c:2459
#8 0x203f38e8 in zendparse () at /home/y/share/bison.simple:432
#9 0x203f6685 in compile_file (file_handle=0x9fbff758, type=2) at
/homes/rasmus/php4/Zend/zend_language_scanner.l:348
#10 0x2040b3a6 in zend_execute_scripts (type=8, retval=0x0, file_count=3) at
/homes/rasmus/php4/Zend/zend.c:860
#11 0x203e41ce in php_execute_script (primary_file=0x9fbff758) at
/homes/rasmus/php4/main/main.c:1591
#12 0x204235d6 in apache_php_module_main (r=0xdc040, display_source_mode=0)
at /homes/rasmus/php4/sapi/apache/sapi_apache.c:55
#13 0x2042419e in send_php (r=0xdc040, display_source_mode=0, filename=0x0)
at /homes/rasmus/php4/sapi/apache/mod_php4.c:617
#14 0x204241fe in send_parsed_php (r=0xdc040) at
/homes/rasmus/php4/sapi/apache/mod_php4.c:632
#15 0x48e84 in ap_invoke_handler (r=0xdc040) at http_config.c:518
#16 0x59cec in process_request_internal (r=0xdc040) at http_request.c:1352
#17 0x59d47 in ap_process_request (r=0xdc040) at http_request.c:1368
#18 0x52977 in child_main (child_num_arg=0) at http_main.c:5229
#19 0x52b18 in make_child (s=0xa4930, slot=0, now=1046217441) at http_main.c:5400
#20 0x52c49 in startup_children (number_to_start=25) at http_main.c:5498
#21 0x53165 in standalone_main (argc=2, argv=0x9fbffa80) at http_main.c:5859
#22 0x538ec in main (argc=2, argv=0x9fbffa80) at http_main.c:6246
-Rasmus
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Announcement: Next generation ext_skel
The current one does, so it better... On Wed, 19 Feb 2003, l0t3k wrote: Hartmut, will this also generate zend_parse_parameters calls based on prototype ? l0t3k Hartmut Holzgraefe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] i've just added the first working results of a replacement for the good old ext_skel script in php/scripts/ext_skel_ng -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] patch for binary-safe strip_tags()
Looks fine to me. On Tue, 25 Feb 2003, Moriyoshi Koizumi wrote: Hi, Attached is the patch for binary-safe strip_tags(). Although it doesn't appear to be harmful anyhow, I think it needs review since it modifies rather sensitive part. Any objections? Moriyoshi -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Performance degradation part 2 the module version
On Sun, 23 Feb 2003, Wez Furlong wrote:
This double seeking is most probably due to the fact that the stdio
layer does one set of seeking, whereas streams needs to do another.
This can be solved by moving away from using stdio for streams, and just
using the raw descriptors instead. (already made a start on this in
PHP 5).
I had a closer look at this. The seeks are not coming from the stdio
layer, they are coming directly from PHP. The first, SEEK_CUR +0 comes
from an ftell() call here in _php_stream_fopen_from_file():
if (stream) {
if (self-is_pipe) {
stream-flags |= PHP_STREAM_FLAG_NO_SEEK;
} else {
stream-position = ftell(file);
}
}
We should be able to skip that ftell() call on a script or include file we
have just opened, right?
And here is the backtrace for the second one:
#0 0x202e6c0f in lseek () from /usr/lib/libc.so.4
#1 0x203ef154 in php_stdiop_seek (stream=0xd640c, offset=0, whence=0,
newoffset=0x9fbfdcbc)
at /homes/rasmus/php4/main/streams.c:1493
#2 0x203ef868 in _php_stream_cast (stream=0xd640c, castas=-1073741824,
ret=0x9fbfdcf0, show_err=8)
at /homes/rasmus/php4/main/streams.c:1952
#3 0x203f04d6 in _php_stream_open_wrapper_as_file (path=0xddad8
/home/y/share/htdocs/test.php, mode=0x2043a223 rb,
options=141, opened_path=0x9fbff328) at /homes/rasmus/php4/main/streams.c:2506
#4 0x203e3b4e in php_fopen_wrapper_for_zend (filename=0xddad8
/home/y/share/htdocs/test.php, opened_path=0x9fbff328)
at /homes/rasmus/php4/main/main.c:727
The php_stdiop_seek() does a direct lseek() call. I don't really see why
this is needed either at this point. In
_php_stream_open_wrapper_as_file() what are you trying to guard against
with that stream_cast call?
if (php_stream_cast(stream,
PHP_STREAM_AS_STDIO|PHP_STREAM_CAST_TRY_HARD|PHP_STREAM_CAST_RELEASE,
(void**)fp, REPORT_ERRORS) == FAILURE)
{
php_stream_close(stream);
if (opened_path *opened_path)
efree(*opened_path);
return NULL;
}
We have already stat()'ed the file to death. We know it is there, that we
are allowed to open it, etc. What could go wrong that the open call just
above it wouldn't have caught? Is it just a case of getting too general
and we need a special-case simpler function for the most common operation
of simply opening script files?
-Rasmus
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] Performance degradation
So, I am just starting out down the path to figure out why PHP 4.3 has gotten so much slower than 4.2. strace -c provides the first clue. A straight ./configure --enable-inline-optimization make command-line build for 4.2, 4.3 and 5.0 run on a simple hello world script reveals that we have gone from 219 system calls in 4.2 to 233 in 4.3 to 236 in 5.0. This is a bad trend and we really need to make an effort to reverse this. 4.2 Hello World from command-line: % time seconds usecs/call callserrors syscall -- --- --- - - 21.860.000266 1617 3 open 19.060.000232 29 8 write 15.690.000191 1118 read 12.570.000153 285 brk 10.440.000127 524 old_mmap 4.110.50 10 5 munmap 3.370.41 7 6 mmap2 2.960.36 5 8 mprotect 2.550.31 215 fstat64 2.380.29 214 close 0.740.09 5 2 lstat64 0.660.08 4 2 rt_sigaction 0.660.08 8 1 getcwd 0.490.06 3 2 2 ioctl 0.490.06 6 1 uname 0.410.05 3 2 setitimer 0.410.05 3 2 fcntl64 0.330.04 4 1 chdir 0.250.03 2 2 getpid 0.250.03 3 1 _llseek 0.160.02 2 1 time 0.080.01 1 1 gettimeofday 0.080.01 1 1 rt_sigprocmask -- --- --- - - 100.000.001217 219 5 total 4.3 Hello World from command-line: % time seconds usecs/call callserrors syscall -- --- --- - - 21.550.000292 1520 7 open 18.300.000248 28 9 write 14.610.000198 1217 read 13.060.000177 295 brk 8.340.000113 522 old_mmap 6.350.86 22 4 lstat64 3.690.50 10 5 munmap 3.030.41 7 6 mmap2 2.580.35 5 7 mprotect 2.360.32 214 fstat64 2.210.30 213 close 0.590.08 2 4 setitimer 0.590.08 3 3 rt_sigaction 0.590.08 8 1 getcwd 0.370.05 5 1 chdir 0.370.05 5 1 uname 0.300.04 2 2 2 ioctl 0.300.04 2 2 fcntl64 0.220.03 2 2 getpid 0.150.02 2 1 time 0.150.02 2 1 gettimeofday 0.150.02 2 1 _llseek 0.150.02 1 2 rt_sigprocmask -- --- --- - - 100.000.001355 233 9 total 5.0 Hello World from command-line: % time seconds usecs/call callserrors syscall -- --- --- - - 21.700.000288 1420 7 open 18.990.000252 28 9 write 15.070.000200 297 brk 14.920.000198 1217 read 8.290.000110 522 old_mmap 5.430.72 12 6 munmap 3.540.47 7 7 mmap2 2.490.33 5 7 mprotect 2.190.29 213 close 2.030.27 214 fstat64 1.430.19 5 4 lstat64 0.680.09 3 3 rt_sigaction 0.600.08 2 4 setitimer 0.600.08 8 1 getcwd 0.380.05 5 1 uname 0.300.04 4 1 chdir 0.300.04 2 2 fcntl64 0.230.03 2 2 getpid 0.230.03 3 1 1 ioctl 0.230.03
Re: [PHP-DEV] Performance degradation
On Sun, 23 Feb 2003, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: RL So, obviously these opens don't really affect the module version RL since they only happen on startup, but they still don't seem right. RL I understand ./php-cgi.ini, but .//php-cgi.ini and .//php.ini? RL Looks like a missing check there. If this is only for CGI/startup, it is indeed not so important, IMHO. After all, CGI is not a performance-star anyway. True, but that doesn't mean we should be doing stupid things like trying to open the same file twice or calling realpath() twice on the same path. And obviously something similar is happening to the module case because we are 10-15% slower in the module version. Either increased memory usage or substantial change in memory usage pattern (e.g., allocation of one big object, than freeing and allocation a number of small objects with the same size should generate less brk's then allocating small ones first and then large one). The script I tested was simply: html body ? echo Hello World; ? /body /html Hopefully executing this should not have caused a big change in memory usage between 4.2 and 4.3. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] Performance degradation part 2 the module version
A little bit harder to get clean output on this one. The numbers in the
's are the times for the system call. Here is a 4.2 hello world
request:
accept(24, {sin_family=AF_INET, sin_port=htons(57198),
sin_addr=inet_addr(10.0.1.254)}}, [16]) = 3 4.035087
rt_sigaction(SIGUSR1, {SIG_IGN}, {0x40035250, [], SA_INTERRUPT|0x400}, 8) = 0
0.09
getsockname(3, {sin_family=AF_INET, sin_port=htons(80),
sin_addr=inet_addr(10.0.1.253)}}, [16]) = 0 0.09
setsockopt(3, SOL_TCP, TCP_NODELAY, [1], 4) = 0 0.11
alarm(300) = 0 0.10
read(3, GET /index.php HTTP/1.0\r\nUser-Ag..., 4096) = 106 0.18
rt_sigaction(SIGUSR1, {SIG_IGN}, {SIG_IGN}, 8) = 0 0.08
time(NULL) = 1046024055 0.08
alarm(300) = 300 0.09
alarm(0)= 300 0.08
stat64(/html/index.php, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0644, st_size=58, ...}) = 0 0.23
alarm(300) = 0 0.09
umask(077) = 022 0.07
umask(022) = 077 0.08
setitimer(ITIMER_PROF, {it_interval={0, 0}, it_value={30, 0}}, NULL) = 0 0.08
rt_sigaction(SIGPROF, {0x40690508, [PROF], SA_RESTART|0x400}, {0x40690508, [PROF],
SA_RESTART|0x400}, 8) = 0 0.08
rt_sigprocmask(SIG_UNBLOCK, [PROF], NULL, 8) = 0 0.08
getcwd(/usr/sbin, 4095) = 10 0.12
chdir(/html) = 0 0.14
open(/html/index.php, O_RDONLY) = 4 0.19
getcwd(/html, 4095) = 6 0.09
lstat64(/html, {st_mode=S_IFDIR|0777, st_size=4096, ...}) = 0 0.12
lstat64(/html/index.php, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0644, st_size=58, ...}) = 0 0.11
ioctl(4, SNDCTL_TMR_TIMEBASE, 0xbfffe1a0) = -1 ENOTTY (Inappropriate ioctl for device)
0.09
fstat64(4, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0644, st_size=58, ...}) = 0 0.08
mmap2(NULL, 4096, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE, MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0) = 0x402ba000
0.27
read(4, html\nbody\n?\n\techo \Hello Wo..., 8192) = 58 0.15
read(4, , 4096) = 0 0.08
read(4, , 8192) = 0 0.08
ioctl(4, SNDCTL_TMR_TIMEBASE, 0xbfffd160) = -1 ENOTTY (Inappropriate ioctl for device)
0.08
close(4)= 0 0.10
munmap(0x402ba000, 4096)= 0 0.13
alarm(300) = 300 0.09
alarm(0)= 300 0.08
chdir(/usr/sbin) = 0 0.19
setitimer(ITIMER_PROF, {it_interval={0, 0}, it_value={0, 0}}, NULL) = 0 0.09
umask(022) = 022 0.07
alarm(0)= 0 0.08
select(4, [3], NULL, NULL, {0, 0}) = 0 (Timeout) 0.10
write(3, HTTP/1.1 200 OK\r\nDate: Sun, 23 F..., 232) = 232 0.34
time(NULL) = 1046024055 0.08
write(39, 10.0.1.254 - - [23/Feb/2003:10:1..., 94) = 94 0.24
alarm(30) = 0 0.09
shutdown(3, 1 /* send */) = 0 0.24
select(4, [3], NULL, NULL, {2, 0}) = 1 (in [3], left {2, 0}) 0.000775
read(3, , 512)= 0 0.14
close(3)= 0 0.27
alarm(0)= 30 0.08
rt_sigaction(SIGUSR1, {0x40035250, [], SA_INTERRUPT|0x400}, {SIG_IGN}, 8) = 0
0.09
alarm(0)= 0 0.08
This is just from accept-to-accept, so it doesn't include any Apache/PHP
startup calls at all. A couple of these syscalls are from Apache but
starting with the alarm(300) call (I think) we are in PHP. The only thing
that looks slightly off to me in this set of calls are the consecutive
umask() calls. Might be something worth tracking down to see if one can
be eliminated. The point here however is to compare to 4.3:
accept(24, {sin_family=AF_INET, sin_port=htons(57262),
sin_addr=inet_addr(10.0.1.254)}}, [16]) = 3 8.485988
rt_sigaction(SIGUSR1, {SIG_IGN}, {0x40035250, [], SA_INTERRUPT|0x400}, 8) = 0
0.09
getsockname(3, {sin_family=AF_INET, sin_port=htons(80),
sin_addr=inet_addr(10.0.1.253)}}, [16]) = 0 0.10
setsockopt(3, SOL_TCP, TCP_NODELAY, [1], 4) = 0 0.12
alarm(300) = 0 0.10
read(3, GET /index.php HTTP/1.0\r\nUser-Ag..., 4096) = 106 0.16
rt_sigaction(SIGUSR1, {SIG_IGN}, {SIG_IGN}, 8) = 0 0.08
time(NULL) = 1046024677 0.08
alarm(300) = 300 0.08
alarm(0)= 300 0.08
stat64(/html/index.php, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0644, st_size=58, ...}) = 0 0.22
alarm(300) = 0 0.09
umask(077) = 022 0.08
umask(022) = 077 0.07
setitimer(ITIMER_PROF, {it_interval={0, 0}, it_value={30, 0}}, NULL) = 0 0.09
rt_sigaction(SIGPROF, {0x4072d6b4, [PROF], SA_RESTART|0x400}, {0x4072d6b4,
Re: [PHP-DEV] Performance degradation part 2 the module version
On Sun, 23 Feb 2003, Jim Jagielski wrote: Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: Even in 4.2, I think we can optimize it. Assuming chdir() doesn't return an error, we shouldn't need that second getpwd() call since we just did the chdir() and we should know where we are. Not necessarily... In a threaded environment, if threadA does chdir(/tmp) and then threadB does chdir(/var), then the actual process is in /var for the remainder of threadA (IIRC). chdir() is process scoped. That's true, but in threaded mode we don't do the chdir() at all. This is specifically for non-threaded. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Performance degradation
On Sun, 23 Feb 2003, Shane Caraveo wrote: Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: So, I am just starting out down the path to figure out why PHP 4.3 has gotten so much slower than 4.2. strace -c provides the first clue. A straight ./configure --enable-inline-optimization make command-line build for 4.2, 4.3 and 5.0 run on a simple hello world script reveals that we have gone from 219 system calls in 4.2 to 233 in 4.3 to 236 in 5.0. This is a bad trend and we really need to make an effort to reverse this. 4.2 Hello World from command-line: CGI, right? Part of this may be from the path_info handling I've added. There is a stat call in there to determine if the path provided by the webserver includes path_info also, if it does have path_info (stat failed), it walks up the path doing a stat to determine the script filename and path_info correctly. the ini setting cgi.fix_pathinfo turns this on or off. It also uses a handfull putenv and getenv calls in straightening things out. I'm sure this adds some of that, but I don't think it would add as much an increase as you are seeing, unless you're using some long path_info paths. The extra realpath() and fstat() calls are not cgi specific, so if what you added only affects cgi, then that isn't the big problem. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] extra realpath() found
Hey Sander, you fixed a problem back in July where you introduced a second realpath() call into the main execute_script() function. I understand what you were trying to achieve, but realpath() is way way too expensive to toss around like that, especially since we already do the realpath on the fopen of the script file. The bug in question was http://bugs.php.net/17720 and your fix was http://cvs.php.net/diff.php/php4/main/main.c?login=2r1=1.461r2=1.462ty=u php_fopen_primary_script() calls expand_filepath() which does the realpath before we get to execute_script. Why not add the path to the included_files list at that point instead? Let me know if you feel like playing with it, otherwise I will. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Performance degradation part 2 the module version
Have you been testing PHP_4_3 from CVS or the actual 4.3.0 release? You might find the situation slightly better using the latest (I tidied up some seek related issues the other day). The straces are from PHP_4_3 HEAD as of this morning. I thought originally that these issues were just a hassle for me at Yahoo! where performance is super-critical and that the average PHP user wouldn't really care. But I am seeing normal users switching back to 4.2 from 4.3 now because of these issues. We can probably live with the seek overhead if I can get rid of the rest. If I can eliminate that one getcwd() call that was also in 4.2, perhaps we can get back to being on par. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP] Threading
On Tue, 18 Feb 2003, Greg Donald wrote: On Tue, 18 Feb 2003, Bruce Miller wrote: Will PHP allow multiple-thread execution? PHP4 does not have thread support. Well, except for pear/PECL/threads, of course. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] [PATCH] Apache 2.0 Handler module
You guys have CVS access, and thus you make the call on what gets accepted
or not. There is no higher power here, you guys know the Apache2 stuff
better than most. You only start getting pushback if you start changing
existing code that might break stuff.
-Rasmus
On Tue, 11 Feb 2003, Ian Holsman wrote:
On Mon, 10 Feb 2003 22:37:44 -0800, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
FWIW, I think I had a minor bug in how it called ap_sub_req_lookup_uri in
my copy of php_functions.c. I posted an updated copy of that file on my
apache.org space. And, I tested virtual('test.html') and it does work
fine.
Regardless, there are now two versions of a filterless SAPI (done
independently!) for httpd-2.0. I'd hope one of them gets accepted. --
justin
ok..
I just tried, and I have CVS write access ;-)
I'll checkin my version (with your fixes justin)
and we'll go from there.
BTW. I am disabling the 'virtual()' function for the mean time until we
have a workaround calling a php page from withing a php page.
The workaround is to use mod-include's SSI functionality.
Regards
Ian
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Reducing the number of system calls for includes
Don't you have any FreeBSD kernel hackers in Y!? You could probably convince/bully one of them to fix it, that's what we always do with ours here ;-) Turns out that one of the problems is that the standard 0x80 way of doing a syscall is rather slow on the P4 chip. P3 and Athlon chips are much faster. As of Linux kernel 2.5.57 or so they are now using sysenter which is much quicker, but FreeBSD is still using 0x80 on the P4. This article has some interesting info on the subject: http://lwn.net/Articles/18411/ In the end it looks like I am simply going to turn off realpath() completely in virtual_file_ex() which means of course that if include_once/require_once is used to access the same file through two different paths due to a symlink, things will break. And you can symlink your way out of an open_basedir restriction. I'll happily trade those things for the extra 40-50 req/sec this is likely to give me. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Reducing the number of system calls for includes
Weird. That was totally contrary to the way I remember it working. In trying to figure out why I remembered incorrectly, I realized the reason why you (in general) want to resolve the path to a canonical path is that you can seriously break include_once and require_once if you dont. Otherwise require_once wont correctly work if you do ? require_once(/home/george/foo.php); require_once(/home/george/../george/foo.php); ? Right, but guarding against this edge case is costing us a lot on the normal case. 100,000 realpath() calls on Linux on file /home/rasmus/foo/u2.inc: real0m1.286s user0m0.190s sys 0m1.030s 100,000 stat() calls on Linux on file /home/rasmus/foo/u2.inc: real0m0.421s user0m0.070s sys 0m0.290s The deeper the directory hierachy, the larger the difference. On FreeBSD we get slammed! Looks like they don't have the same dcache-like thing that Linux has. 100,000 realpath() calls on /home/rasmus/foo/u2.inc on FreeBSD: real0m51.274s user0m6.752s sys 0m26.478s 100,000 stats() calls on the same file on FreeBSD: real0m8.873s user0m0.165s sys 0m8.042s So yes, it does look like we don't need to worry too much on Linux, but clearly on FreeBSD avoiding stat() calls and calls that create cascading stat()'s are to be avoided at all costs. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Reducing the number of system calls for includes
That said, we could possibly have a fast mode and use fstat() to get some device information on the open file. I am worried about functionality though. I'm not sure it's worth breaking. Yes, fstat() is fast. And perhaps it isn't worth breaking functionality across the board, but in my particular case I don't really have a choice. It is simply too slow to handle the loads that it needs to handle and either I need to get twice as many machines or I need to lose some functionality. Another idea would be to try to streamline the normal case for an absolute pathname. How about doing a readlink() on it. If that tells us that it is a link, then we know there is something funky and we can do a realpath, otherwise we just assume it is canonical assuming there are no . .. or // in the filename in which case we fall back to a realpath() as well. Or, the really straightforward dumbass solution, have some hint we can pass along that tells the parser to treat what follows as a canonical filename. include \001/home/rasmus/foo/u2.inc; A bit too hacky I guess. Perhaps something like: include_canonical /home/rasmus/foo/u2.inc; And we would simply assume that this is a canonical filename and skip all the checks. This last one is probably what I will need to do, but I will do some tests on the readlink() optimization and see if that buys me anything. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Reducing the number of system calls for includes
The question here is whether it's worthwhile to optimize for the case where you have 30+ includes per page. Is it that common? In my particular case just 2 or 3 includes puts me over the top actually. stat() is amazingly slow on freebsd and having 3 includes of files in a directory 8 levels below the root is going to do 27 stat()'s. 27 stats on my freebsd box here takes 24ms to execute. That's a long time to be sitting around stat'ing things. And heaven help me if the path is not absolute and I have to try different include paths. And if open_basedir is also enabled you might as well go for a coffee while you wait through some 80+ syscalls for every include. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Reducing the number of system calls for includes
I think the best solution to this problem, without breaking functionality, is to use a cache for realpath() in virtual_file_ex(). This should solve the performance problems and not effect BC at all. As TSRM always passes a full path to the realpath() call there, it should always work. Perhaps make it configurable because on Linux there already is a dcache right in the kernel which is likely to be faster than anything we can do. As far as I know, Linux is the only OS with such a kernel-level cache. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] Reducing the number of system calls for includes
Take this script:
? include '/home/rasmus/foo/u2.inc' ?
So, a simple include with an absolute pathname to avoid any include_path
searching and all safe_mode and open_basedir checking turned off. The
latter of course being an absolute killer. We still need a lot of system
calls to handle this include:
getcwd(/home/rasmus, 4096)= 13
lstat64(/home, {st_mode=S_IFDIR|0755, st_size=4096, ...}) = 0
lstat64(/home/rasmus, {st_mode=S_IFDIR|0777, st_size=45056, ...}) = 0
lstat64(/home/rasmus/foo, {st_mode=S_IFDIR|0755, st_size=4096, ...}) = 0
lstat64(/home/rasmus/foo/u2.inc, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0644, st_size=12, ...}) = 0
open(/home/rasmus/foo/u2.inc, O_RDONLY) = 3
fstat64(3, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0644, st_size=12, ...}) = 0
fstat64(3, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0644, st_size=12, ...}) = 0
fstat64(3, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0644, st_size=12, ...}) = 0
mmap2(NULL, 4096, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE, MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0) = 0x4002c000
_llseek(3, 0, [0], SEEK_CUR)= 0
lseek(3, 0, SEEK_SET) = 0
The 4 lstat64() calls here are due to calling realpath() which causes
every dir leading up to the filename to be stat'ed to check if it is a
link so we can normalize the filename before adding it to the included
files list. It's handy and nice to normalize the path here, but it is
really really expensive! And this overhead doesn't go away with opcode
caches either as they still need to go through this step to determine if
the included file has been cached or not. I also don't see the point of
those three fstat64() calls that I guess are a result of the sanity
checking we do after the fopen.
Due to our current implementation, if you have a lot of includes, you
really should put all your include files in / and you will see some
impressive improvements. This is annoying, but I am not sure how to fix
it. A couple of things crossed my mind:
1. Don't normalize the path names, but instead do a single stat on the
file and record the device and inode of it and use that to match it
up later to check for multiple inclusion and the various opcode
caches would use that as a cache key.
2. Add a fast_include directive, or something equally lame-sounding,
which skips the getcwd(), realpath() and sanity checks and just
includes the file.
3. For absolute paths, don't call realpath() to normalize, just strip
out multiple /'s and any .'s or whatever we think is necessary to
try to normalize it short of having to stat every single dir leading
up to the file.
4. Do some sort of caching on this info so it doesn't happen on every
include on every request.
-Rasmus
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Reducing the number of system calls for includes
On Sat, 25 Jan 2003, Sascha Schumann wrote: files list. It's handy and nice to normalize the path here, but it is really really expensive! ..only on systems with ultra slow syscall setup procedures (e.g. Solaris) or lack of directory cache. Due to our current implementation, if you have a lot of includes, you really should put all your include files in / and you will see some impressive improvements. Can you put some numbers on that? I've done quite a lot of benchmarking and those calls never appeared on the radar. Well, take an app that has 30 includes in a directory 5 levels deep. Just the realpath() call is going to do 180 stats every time that script is hit. Not sure how that wouldn't show up on the radar regardless of the OS. You probably don't have anything that has 30 includes, but people out there write code like that. 5. Looking at Linux's syscall implementation and implementing the good ideas in FreeBSD. Well yes, but fixing the os is pretty drastic. For now I will be patching things here to short-circuit all that stuff, but I think it is also something we should look at in general for PHP. As for numbers, I basically doubled the req/sec rate of a box by eliminating a bunch of system calls caused by include_path and open_basedir stat'ing, so in my particular situation here eliminating as many syscalls as I can is having a direct effect. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Reducing the number of system calls for includes
As for numbers, I basically doubled the req/sec rate of a box by eliminating a bunch of system calls caused by include_path and open_basedir stat'ing, so in my particular situation here eliminating as many syscalls as I can is having a direct effect. What OS are you running on? Are you running over NFS? FreeBSD and no. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Reducing the number of system calls for includes
I can't really think of any way of getting around this. include_once() and require_once() are basic language constructs and they require this. Well, they require us to be able to uniquely identify a file, they do not necessarily require us to know the canonical filename. This could be done in a single stat where we grab the device number and inode. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Reducing the number of system calls for includes
On Sat, 25 Jan 2003, Andi Gutmans wrote:
At 04:32 PM 1/24/2003 -0800, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
I can't really think of any way of getting around this. include_once() and
require_once() are basic language constructs and they require this.
Well, they require us to be able to uniquely identify a file, they do not
necessarily require us to know the canonical filename. This could be done
in a single stat where we grab the device number and inode.
Yeah but on broken systems single stat's also stat each directory (AFAIK).
I don't think it's any faster or at least not noticably.
Which broken systems? Certainly not on FreeBSD or Linux. A little test:
#include sys/types.h
#include sys/stat.h
#include stdio.h
int main(void) {
struct stat sb;
stat(/home/rasmus/foo/u2.inc,sb);
printf(%d:%d\n,sb.st_dev, sb.st_ino);
}
That ends up doing just a single stat on FreeBSD:
stat(/home/rasmus/foo/u2.inc,0x9fbffa0c) = 0 (0x0)
and on Linux:
stat64(/home/rasmus/foo/u2.inc, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0644, st_size=12, ...}) = 0
-Rasmus
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Reducing the number of system calls for includes
Eliminating realpath for fully qualified paths make sense to me. But... don't you Y! guys use php-a? Shouldn't this hide that overhead completely from you by completely eliminating all the stats on a require/include after the initial compilation? Or is this just a It doesn't eliminate it at all, no. These checks are still done even on accelerated includes in both zend cache and ioncube. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] roadmap of PHP - where? PHP 5 - when?
On Thu, 23 Jan 2003, Zeev Suraski wrote: Ok, I can't be bothered to fight a mailing list that was supposed to trim down endless discussions. I'm not the one that asked for the list, but I definitely supported it, as unlike most of the members on this list, I remember the pre-v4 days, and what kind of mountains we had to push in order to get it released half a year after it was ready. But as you said, no matter what valid reasons there are for having this list, we got to a situation where the fuzzy feeling will always outweigh the logic, and nobody will ever be able to persuade anybody otherwise. Whatever, let's end the list. You should have learned this by now. Perception and warm fuzzies is an extremely important part of a large open source project that relies heavily on a large number of volunteers. Messing with that is playing with fire. I believe we can get work done on php-dev, especially if people can hold back on replying to trolls. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] request data filter
I cannot agree more. There is only so much you can do outside the PHP (as I do in mod_security). I've finished the code. I'll run it through its paces here and commit it soon. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] request data filter
In trying to implement a security policy I need to pass all user-supplied data (GET/POST/Cookie) through a filter function which implements this security. This isn't all that hard to implement as an extension through new 4.3 treat_data and post_handler hooks, however it gets messy when you throw mbstring into the mix as that extension also uses those hooks. The cleanest way I can think of doing this is to add a function pointer to SAPI for the filtering function that will be run right before the php_register_variable_safe() call. Currently we are always calling php_url_decode() on the data before registering the variable, so I propose that we make php_url_decode() the default that an extension can then override. Anybody see any reason not to make this simple change? Without that I will need to somehow detect whether mbstring is present and then filter the data after it has already been registered by mbstring's treat_data/post_handler hooks. That's a big mess! -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] request data filter
On Wed, 15 Jan 2003, George Schlossnagle wrote: You consider running the apache_hooks code? This should be simple there. You mean do the filtering straight from a PHP script that gets called from a hook? That's a lot of looping through a bunch of arrays. This has to happen on every request on the busiest site in the world; it needs to be written in C. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] 4.3.1 (was: [PHP-CVS] cvs: php4(PHP_4_3) /main SAPI.h)
Who said that we're not going to release a 4.3.1 or 4.3.n? I'm just not favoring new code going into the PHP_4_3 branch, but only bugfixes. I'd like to see new functionality going into HEAD, for PHP 5. You might favor that, but I don't pretend that PHP 5.x will become useful immediately for my purposes. I need something to rely on and that is PHP 4 at this time. I completely agree. We can't stall all new development waiting for PHP 5. For example, my little user data filter hook thing would be considered a new feature that I really can't wait for PHP 5 for. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] variables_order annoyance
Check out this bug report: http://bugs.php.net/16155 Ah thanks, that's where I remember the discussion from. I do disagree with one part: (c) It shouldn't be possible to prevent $_GET, $_POST, $_COOKIE, and $_FILES from being populated. Why in the world not? I explicitly need to be able to prevent $_COOKIE from being populated and showing up in $_REQUEST here at Yahoo because we have access functions that we want to force people to go through to fetch cookie data. I think we should just have a completely clean separation of variable ordering priority and superglobal array population. Before register_globals it made sense to just have one setting for this as you couldn't have one without the other, but today it doesn't make sense anymore. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] variables_order annoyance
Guys, I think this was brought up before, and I somehow had the impression that we fixed it, but we didn't. Currently if variables_order does not contain a certain type then that type will not be populated in the $_FOO superglobal. So, if you set variables_order = GP because you only want Get and Post data in your $_REQUEST array, perhaps, and you have register_globals off, then $_COOKIE, $_ENV, $_SERVER will not be populated. This is a pain in the ass! The two concepts should be separate. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-WIN] PHP 4.3.0 no gif support?
It's gif read-only, so you only have imagecreatefromgif() On Mon, 6 Jan 2003, Brian Weil wrote: Thanks a million, Can you tell me which gif functions are available in this build? Thanks Again, Brian -Original Message- From: Edin Kadribasic [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2003 5:59 PM To: Brian Weil; Rasmus Lerdorf Cc: PHP developer list Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-WIN] PHP 4.3.0 no gif support? Hello, Read-only GIF support has now been enabled in the windows version of the bundled GDLIB. Fixed version of php_gd2.dll compatible with PHP 4.3.0 will be available from http://snaps.php.net/win32/php4-win32-STABLE-latest.zip in approx. 8 hours. Edin - Original Message - From: Brian Weil [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2003 6:31 PM Subject: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-WIN] PHP 4.3.0 no gif support? So... WIll gif support ever be available on win32? Can a patched gd.dll be found somewhere with readonly gif support or will we have to re-install php when the binary is updated? I've been (patiently) waiting for this since GD1.6. Thanks, Brian Rasmus Lerdorf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Hrm.. Whoever built the Windows binary didn't define HAVE_GD_GIF_READ I guess. Or perhaps it should go into main/config.w32.h.in assuming we are always going to build the windows binary against the bundled gd library. -Rasmus On Fri, 3 Jan 2003, Zac Barton wrote: hi all, i thought php 4.3 was ment to have read-only access to gif images? all i get via phpinfo(); is: GD Support enabled GD Version bundled (2.0 compatible) FreeType Support enabled FreeType Linkage with freetype JPG Support enabled PNG Support enabled WBMP Support enabled wheres the gif read support? php 4.3 d/loaded via www.php.net so its the correct version.. what am i missing? does gif read support mean i can load a gif image then output it as a PNG? many thanks in advance zac barton -- PHP Windows Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] ZE2 + php 4.4.0
If it was stable we would release it. So no, stick with the released code. -Rasmus On Fri, 3 Jan 2003, Tularis wrote: would this combination be considered 'stable enough' to use (win32) in a small test environement? Or should I just use ZE1 + php4.3 -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-WIN] PHP 4.3.0 no gif support?
Hrm.. Whoever built the Windows binary didn't define HAVE_GD_GIF_READ I guess. Or perhaps it should go into main/config.w32.h.in assuming we are always going to build the windows binary against the bundled gd library. -Rasmus On Fri, 3 Jan 2003, Zac Barton wrote: hi all, i thought php 4.3 was ment to have read-only access to gif images? all i get via phpinfo(); is: GD Support enabled GD Version bundled (2.0 compatible) FreeType Support enabled FreeType Linkage with freetype JPG Support enabled PNG Support enabled WBMP Support enabled wheres the gif read support? php 4.3 d/loaded via www.php.net so its the correct version.. what am i missing? does gif read support mean i can load a gif image then output it as a PNG? many thanks in advance zac barton -- PHP Windows Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] new database extension
All the extensions are under ext/ Those two specifically are ext/pgsql and ext/oci8 On Fri, 3 Jan 2003, Chandler, Jacob R wrote: I want to write a new extension specific to the MIMER database (www.mimer.com). This will be similar to the extensions for PostgreSQL, Oracle, etc. and will allow native connection as an option instead of using ODBC. However, I'm not exactly sure where to start and wanted to look at those specific extensions. Can someone tell me where I might find this within the PHP source? Jacob Chandler Programmer/Analyst I Computer Services Sam Houston State University [EMAIL PROTECTED] 936 294-3160 -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Update: Quoting behaviour exposed
Sascha, we need to give you something constructive to work on... -Rasmus (top-posted with lots of quoted text just for you) On Sat, 28 Dec 2002, Sascha Schumann wrote: After looking at a few messages again, I noticed that my script also considered signatures (personal and the mailing list's) as original lines. Once these are kicked out, we see a far worse picture (the ratios almost double): 1%: = 34.60 5%: = 12.50 10%: = 6.75 15%: = 4.50 And the top 10 again (messages with a ratio = 3): Jani Taskinen avg of 18.86 in 3 postings John Coggeshallavg of 14.12 in 10 postings Xavier Spriet avg of 12.71 in 8 postings Ilia A.avg of 12.22 in 7 postings Marcus Börger avg of 12.03 in 22 postings George Schlossnagleavg of 11.78 in 4 postings Moriyoshi Koizumi avg of 10.44 in 14 postings Andi Gutmans avg of 10.22 in 22 postings Markus Fischer avg of 9.42 in 5 postings Wez Furlongavg of 8.97 in 4 postings - Sascha -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP] XML-Presentationsystem from the Conf2002
Check it out of cvs. It is in the pres2 directory. On Fri, 27 Dec 2002, Tobias Schlitt wrote: Hi folks! I saw the nice-looking presentationsystem, written in PHP and using XML, on the PHP-Conference this year. I liked that very much and think it's must for every PHP-related presentation. So, can anyone tell me, where to download the system? Has anyone got it at home and could send me a quick tar-ball of it per mail?? Thanks for your help! Hope you all had merry X-Mas! Regards, Toby -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] option to start in PHP mode
We do already have -r, but I haven't changed my mind on this one either. Why introduce 2 different kinds of PHP files? On Fri, 27 Dec 2002, Andi Gutmans wrote: I don't think it's beneficial to PHP to have two modes especially as the cli more you're talking about would support ? followed by a ?php. So all you're saving is the opening tag. I think any PHP programmer can handle it. Let's keep things similar across the board. Andi At 02:11 PM 12/27/2002 -0500, Andrei Zmievski wrote: We've talked about this in the past, but let's bring it up again. It is a bit awkward to use CLI when it requires those ?php and ? tags. We should probably have a command-line option that tells the parser to start in PHP mode instead of HTML/text. Any thoughts on this? -Andrei http://www.gravitonic.com/ * What were the first 15 billion years of the universe like for you? * -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] $scalar{index} syntax
You mean $string{2} ? That's the more correct way to do $string[2] to
make it clear that it is a character offset. This has been supported for
years and will not go away.
-Rasmus
On Tue, 10 Dec 2002, Brad Bulger wrote:
trying to fix bugs in some PEAR code, i noticed the person used a way
of getting at the individual characters in a string:
$string{2} === substr($string,2,1)
is that old syntax or something? is there any reason to expect it to work
in future versions?
thanks
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Patch for gd.c
I have committed this, sort of anyway. I moved the check up as there is really no reason to go through and even try to do the deallocate on a truecolour image. -Rasmus On Sat, 23 Nov 2002, Moriyoshi Koizumi wrote: Hi, This tiny patch prevents the warnings when applying imagecolordeallocate() on true colour values. I suppose this new behaviour would be more consistent because we can use imagecolorallocate() with true colour images. Then what do you guys think about this issue? Moriyoshi -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] apache_hooks
Apache_hooks is an Apache 1.3 SAPI module which lets you execute PHP code at every stage of the Apache request handling cycle instead of just the content handling hook that the normal apache sapi module uses. It was a super experimental thing I put together ages ago that George and Lukas have now cleaned up/rewritten to be much more efficient and complete. -Rasmus On Tue, 19 Nov 2002, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: What is apache_hooks SAPI module? It looks like it produces errors in my build... And no docs there. What's that? -- Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Products Engineer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.zend.com/ +972-3-6139665 ext.109 -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] error handling
Well, I certainly don't want errors handled this way for my web apps. And you would be hard pressed to find 2 people on this list that agree exactly how to do it which is why PHP provides you with the tools to do it any way you want. -Rasmus On Mon, 18 Nov 2002, Mattia wrote: I think in a modern web application the error handling function should do the following: in case of error (any: parse error, internal application error,) 1. a message should be shown to the user sayng that an error has occured like an internal error has occured. the webmaster has been notified via email 2. a more detailed message should be logged in a generic system ErrorLog, or notified via email or fax, or telephone, or SMS. Depending on the severity of the error (warning, fatal,...) All this done with PHP error handling function (this is not to male distinction between PHP error and application internal error), and the ErrorLog kept via system/server methods (like syslogd). The message shown to the user should be accompained by an HTTP 500 (or more) error. This to make clear to human users that an error has occured therefore the request cannot be fulfilled, and if the cliens is another computer (robot,...) to make it as well (computer look at error codes rather than at things written for humans. I know this is possible now, but not within the error handling function of PHP, or without setting a custom error handler. Mattia Cazzola -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] getimagesize() broken in HEAD
getimagesize() works ok in the 4.3 branch, but in HEAD it is returning weird data. streams problem? too tired to track it down right now. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] getimagesize() broken in HEAD
Try grabbing this image: lerdorf.com/serverside.png And do a getimagesize() on it. I am getting a negative value for the width. -Rasmus On Mon, 18 Nov 2002, Marcus Börger wrote: At 11:20 18.11.2002, Derick Rethans wrote: On Mon, 18 Nov 2002, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: getimagesize() works ok in the 4.3 branch, but in HEAD it is returning weird data. streams problem? too tired to track it down right now. It might have something to do with this patch: http://cvs.php.net/diff.php/php4/ext/standard/image.c?login=2r1=1.72r2=1.73ty=h Derick But i applied the same patch to 4.3 and branch. For me both 4.3 and branch are working. -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] getimagesize() broken in HEAD
It is one I created for a presentation. Just about to give a tutorial at Apachecon here in Vegas and the slide with this image on it was broken because of this bug. I swear that my 100-slide PHP talk is one of the best regression test cases we have for PHP. ;) -Rasmus On Mon, 18 Nov 2002, Marcus Börger wrote: Fixed. Are you on a online book or where does the image come from? marcus At 16:23 18.11.2002, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: Try grabbing this image: lerdorf.com/serverside.png And do a getimagesize() on it. I am getting a negative value for the width. -Rasmus On Mon, 18 Nov 2002, Marcus Börger wrote: At 11:20 18.11.2002, Derick Rethans wrote: On Mon, 18 Nov 2002, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: getimagesize() works ok in the 4.3 branch, but in HEAD it is returning weird data. streams problem? too tired to track it down right now. It might have something to do with this patch: http://cvs.php.net/diff.php/php4/ext/standard/image.c?login=2r1=1.72r 2=1.73ty=h Derick But i applied the same patch to 4.3 and branch. For me both 4.3 and branch are working. -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] Re: #20461 [Opn-Bgs]: Unable to access $PHP_AUTH_USER or $PHP_AUTH_PW
I'm still not overly convinced that this isn't a restriction that should only kick in when safe_mode or open_basedir is active. This change is going to break working code and it is not a security fix on non-shared servers. -Rasmus On 18 Nov 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ID: 20461 Updated by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reported By: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Status: Open +Status: Bogus Bug Type: Apache related Operating System: Linux 2.4.8 PHP Version: 4CVS-2002-11-17 New Comment: Then that is an external auth mechanism and means this is not a bug in PHP: From: http://www.php.net/manual/en/features.http-auth.php In order to prevent someone from writing a script which reveals the password for a page that was authenticated through a traditional external mechanism, the PHP_AUTH variables will not be set if external authentication is enabled for that particular page. In this case, REMOTE_USER can be used to identify the externally-authenticated user. So, $_SERVER['REMOTE_USER']. Configuration Note: PHP uses the presence of an AuthType directive to determine whether external authentication is in effect. Remember to avoid this directive for the context where you want to use PHP authentication (otherwise each authentication attempt will fail). There was a bug in previous PHP 4 versions which let the external authenticated usernames and passwords to be revealed for scripts. This is fixed in PHP 4.3.0. (btw. you really should upgrade your apache to 1.3.27! And forget Apache2, it really is not ready for production use) Previous Comments: [2002-11-17 22:45:43] [EMAIL PROTECTED] forgot to answer your other question.. using apache 1.3.20 -- been wanting to upgrade to 2.0 but have had a whole different set of problems w/ that, so taking things one step at a time... [2002-11-17 22:43:25] [EMAIL PROTECTED] tried using $_SERVER already, no dice. i meant using the mod_auth module in apache to protect certain directories.. when those directories are accessed, the browser pops up a window for the user to enter in their username/password for that resource... [2002-11-17 22:23:00] [EMAIL PROTECTED] I can not reproduce this, it works fine here. Try accessing the variables through $_SERVER variable: $_SERVER['PHP_AUTH_USER'] $_SERVER['PHP_AUTH_PW'] And what Apache version are you using? What do you mean with regular http authentication through apache ?? [2002-11-17 22:09:27] [EMAIL PROTECTED] not using any external auth... simply using regular http authentication through apache... certain directories on the webserver are protected, and so it pops up the box asking the user for username/password.. and then rather then ask them AGAIN for a login for some of my web-based apps, i simply pass the http auth info (via $PHP_AUTH_USER and $PHP_AUTH_PW) along to these apps. the only problem is, those 2 variables don't seem to exist anymore for me. nothing has changed in my configuration except for the fact that i'm now using the cvs version of php as opposed to 4.2.3 (if you read in my original bug report it explains why). [2002-11-17 20:13:05] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Are you using some external auth mechanism? The remainder of the comments for this report are too long. To view the rest of the comments, please view the bug report online at http://bugs.php.net/20461 -- Edit this bug report at http://bugs.php.net/?id=20461edit=1 -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: #20461 [Opn-Bgs]: Unable to access $PHP_AUTH_USERor $PHP_AUTH_PW
On Mon, 18 Nov 2002, Derick Rethans wrote: On Sun, 17 Nov 2002, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: I'm still not overly convinced that this isn't a restriction that should only kick in when safe_mode or open_basedir is active. This change is going to break working code and it is not a security fix on non-shared servers. True, but it was clearly documented that it shouldn't work. Do we really have to make a feature out of every bug? I'd say no... But why do you assume that the documentation was right and the code was wrong and not the other way around? -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: #20461 [Opn-Bgs]: Unable to access $PHP_AUTH_USERor $PHP_AUTH_PW
But why do you assume that the documentation was right and the code was wrong and not the other way around? Because it was working like documented before. (When the documentation was written). Anyway, not sure what to do with this one... I don't have the energy to do a cvs check, but I remember adding this restriction years ago (php2 days) and then removing it (by commenting out the check) ages ago as well. I'm not sure PHP4 ever had this check turned on (the commented out check was ported to php4), so the documentation has not reflected reality in a very long time. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] Re: #20441 [Opn-Bgs]: PHP_AUTH_USER isn't set
That's not true. At least the From the beginning of time part. This
used to be a restriction, then it was lost, now it is back. You can go
scour cvs for the exact versions affected.
I am personally not entirely happy about this change either. It is
definitely a security issue for shared server environments, and as such
perhaps the restriction should only be triggered when safe-mode is on.
-Rasmus
On Fri, 15 Nov 2002, Edin Kadribasic wrote:
Well actually you could. From the beginning of time up to 4.3.0. I
expect to see a lot of bug reports similar to this one.
Edin
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, November 15, 2002 10:10 AM
Subject: #20441 [Opn-Bgs]: PHP_AUTH_USER isn't set
ID: 20441
Updated by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reported By: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Status: Open
+Status: Bogus
Bug Type: Apache related
Operating System: Redhat Linux 7.1 kernel 2.4.2-2
PHP Version: 4.3.0-pre2
New Comment:
You need to decide if you are using an external auth mechanism or
http
auth from php. You can't do both.
Previous Comments:
--
--
[2002-11-15 02:58:24] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I've upgraded PHP 4.2.3 to the beta 4.3.0-pre2 and I've set
register
globals on in php.ini.
My Apache version is 1.3.24.
PHP configure:
./configure --with-apxs=/usr/local/apache/bin/apxs
--with-mysql=/usr/local/mysql --enable-ftp --with-openssl
The script is using this .htaccess-file
AuthType Basic
AuthName 'Urenregistratie'
AuthUserFile /htpasswd/urenreg
require valid-user
I am sure that Apache is setting the PHP_AUTH_USER because the
following script gives the correct output:
// begin dirty hack
$headers = apache_request_headers();
foreach ($headers as $header = $value) {
if ($header == Authorization)
{
$value = str_replace( , , $value);
$value = str_replace(Basic, , $value);
$userArray = explode(:, base64_decode($value));
$PHP_AUTH_USER = $userArray[0];
}
}
echo $PHP_AUTH_USER;
// end dirty hack
If I echo $PHP_AUTH_USER or $_SERVER[PHP_AUTH_USER] above this
script
I am getting a empty result.
Note: the script was functioning 100% properly with php 4.2.3
--
--
--
Edit this bug report at http://bugs.php.net/?id=20441edit=1
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP and Threading
Nope, that is unlikely to happen. The way to do this correctly is with a socket_select() anyway. -Rasmus On Thu, 14 Nov 2002, Arjen Brouwer wrote: Hi, I was wondering, is PHP in future going to support threading? This would be a very nice feature. I'am currently working on this project of mine, a FTP Server build in PHP which serve MySQL database records. It actually does work very nice, also multiple clients at the same time. It supports passive and active FTP. But my problem here is that the FTP server only can handle one file transfer at a time. Threading would be the solution. Are there any plans implementing it? Cheers, Arjen -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] strpos() suggestion
The reason the functions are the way they are is because they directly mirror the underlying C functions. strrpos() calls strrchr() directly. But yes, some sort of new php_memnstr() based string searcher could probably be written. -Rasmus On 13 Nov 2002, Monte Ohrt wrote: Hi, I had a little problem to solve today, and couldn't find any easy way to do it without some extra steps slicing things up. What I wanted to do is take an arbitrary point in a string, and find the position of the first '[' on the left of it, and the first ']' on the right of it. Finding the ']' was easy, I use strpos() to find the first occurance of ']' after my given point. Finding '[' however is not so easy. strrpos() was my first guess, but it does not work like strpos() at all. There is no optional third parameter, and on an unrelated note it only works with a single character, not a string. inconsistant ;-) My best solution was to slice the string at my point, then get the position of '[' with strrpos(). I'm not sure of the most intuitive way to solve this. One way would be to add a feature to strpos(); if you supply a negative third parameter, it gives you the position of the first occurance to the _left_ of that point. I'm not sure if the number should represent the position from the end or beginning of the string. Another way, add a third parameter to strrpos() to start at a given point from the end of the string. I'd try submitting a patch, but I'm not sure of which way would be best, and my C is a bit rusty, I'd probably do more damage than help ;-) Thoughts? Monte -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP-DEV] bison error [was: PHP 4.3.0]
Linux On Mon, 11 Nov 2002, Dave Viner wrote: is that on win32? or linux ? -Original Message- From: Rasmus Lerdorf [mailto:rasmus;php.net] Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 5:01 PM To: Dave Viner Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] bison error [was: PHP 4.3.0] I'm not seeing any problems with bison-1.75 here. On Fri, 8 Nov 2002, Dave Viner wrote: here's the message i posted to [EMAIL PROTECTED] for more help in the bison problem. http://www.geocrawler.com/lists/3/GNU/350/0/10107563/ I'm not good enough with bison to understand why it produces no error message and yet does not produce a .c file. even reducing the bison command to its simplest form: Administrator@DVINER-LAP /cygdrive/d/php/php4/Zend $ bison zend_language_parser.y Administrator@DVINER-LAP /cygdrive/d/php/php4/Zend $ ls -l zend_language_parser* -rwxr-xr-x1 Administ None33095 Nov 6 09:56 zend_language_parser.y Administrator@DVINER-LAP /cygdrive/d/php/php4/Zend $ bison zend_ini_parser.y zend_ini_parser.y:215.4-6: unrecognized escape: `\\0' Administrator@DVINER-LAP /cygdrive/d/php/php4/Zend $ ls -l zend_ini_parser* -rwxr-xr-x1 Administ None 6336 Nov 6 09:56 zend_ini_parser.y Administrator@DVINER-LAP /cygdrive/d/php/php4/Zend $ Still fails. The zend_ini_parser produces a warning or error at least. zend_ini_parser.y:215.4-6: unrecognized escape: `\\0' But I'm not good enough with bison to know how to fix it ! dave -Original Message- From: Andi Gutmans [mailto:andi;zend.com] Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 2:34 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PHP-DEV] PHP 4.3.0 Hey, What's the schedule for 4.3? It seems to be lingering. That said I'd like to resolve the bison issue before we release it (i.e. make sure that ZE1 isn't bitten by versions 1.28). Andi -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] $HTTP_RAW_POST_DATA
Hrm.. Ok, actually Hartmut changed this recently. See:
http://cvs.php.net/diff.php/php4/main/php_content_types.c?login=2r1=1.21r2=1.22ty=u
It works when you turn on always_populate_raw_post_data, right?
-Rasmus
On Sun, 10 Nov 2002, Kjartan Mannes wrote:
Using telnet and raw http
REQUEST
POST /test_post_data.php HTTP/1.0
Host: www.example.com
Content-type: spam/spam
Content-length: 17
data=Testop=Post
PHP 4.2.3 REPLY
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 13:42:26 GMT
Server: Apache/1.3.27 (Unix) PHP/4.2.3
X-Powered-By: PHP/4.2.3
Connection: close
Content-Type: text/html
$_POST:
array(0) {
}
$HTTP_RAW_POST_DATA
string(17) data=Testop=Post
PHP 4.3-dev REPLY
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 13:40:17 GMT
Server: Apache/1.3.27 (Unix) PHP/4.3.0-dev
X-Powered-By: PHP/4.3.0-dev
Connection: close
Content-Type: text/html
$_POST:
array(0) {
}
$HTTP_RAW_POST_DATA
NULL
Since $_POST isn't populated I am assuming neither version of PHP
recognizes my spam/spam content type, but the current cvs version fails
to populate $HTTP_RAW_POST_DATA. So either my request is wrong and 4.2.3
is accepting invalid input, or something has changed in PHP and it isn't
handling the POST request as expected anymore.
--
Kjartan [EMAIL PROTECTED] (http://natrak.net/)
:: Bad Command or File Name. Good try, though.
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: apache_hooks
Hrm.. That's not a bad idea. An ApacheHooks SAPI module sounds like the right approach to me. -R On Sun, 10 Nov 2002, George Schlossnagle wrote: While most of the code in main/ is changed minimally, the changes to the SAPI/apache stuff are pretty extensive. It may make sense to ifdef the changes in main and create a new SAPI module for this. I bend to the majority though. :) On Sunday, November 3, 2002, at 03:49 AM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: Well, since 99% of the code is the same, I'd be worried about people remembering to merge fixes across. At least if it is ifdef'ed people see the code. But yes, I agree, that's not pretty either. -R On Sun, 3 Nov 2002, George Schlossnagle wrote: Either way works for me. Psychologically, I think it may get higher exposure if it is #ifdef'd, but I have style reservations about doing that. How has this sort of thing been done in the past? Is it undesirable to fork the apache sapi into a new 'apache_hooks' sapi? That may be easiest. George On Saturday, November 2, 2002, at 05:58 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: What do you think would be the best way to make the apache_hooks code more accessible to people? A tarball with the relevant files that overwrites the standard files, or perhaps it is time to #ifdef it into the main branch? -Rasmus // George Schlossnagle // Principal Consultant // OmniTI, Inc http://www.omniti.com // (c) 240.460.5234 (e) [EMAIL PROTECTED] // 1024D/1100A5A0 1370 F70A 9365 96C9 2F5E 56C2 B2B9 262F 1100 A5A0 -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Freeing memory
Yup, you will need to FREE_ZVAL() it On 9 Nov 2002, Tony Leake wrote: Hi, I am getting the following output from a php script that calls an extension I am writing (I have compiled the extension with --enable-debug) /home/phpcvs/php4_head/ext/pipe/pipe.c(245) : Freeing 0x0822568C (12 bytes), script=test.php /home/phpcvs/php4_head/ext/pipe/pipe.c(244) : Freeing 0x0822564C (12 bytes), script=test.php where lines lines 245 and 244 are: MAKE_STD_ZVAL(read); MAKE_STD_ZVAL(write); Does this mean that I need to free the memory from the zvals when the script exits, or is this just information? Thanks for your help Tony -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] $HTTP_RAW_POST_DATA
Yes, it has to be a POST request for there to be post data and $HTTP_RAW_POST_DATA is populated if the mime type of the data is unrecoginized or if always_populate_raw_post_data is on. On Sat, 9 Nov 2002, Kjartan Mannes wrote: Wednesday, August 28, 2002, 3:15:13 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: is $HTTP_RAW_POST_DATA only filled if REQUEST_TYPE is set to POST? even if 'always_populate_raw_post_data = On'? does anyone have a short info on this? rasmus maybe? I to would like know when $HTTP_RAW_POST_DATA is supposed to be set. I recently upgrade from 4.2.3 to 4.3.0-dev and one of my scripts stopped working as $HTTP_RAW_POST_DATA wasn't set when data was POSTed. To fix this I had to turn always_populate_raw_post_data on. Any documentation on this variable should work? -- Kjartan [EMAIL PROTECTED] (http://natrak.net/) :: Scandisk is now checking your hard disk. You can start praying. -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] turning strlen() into an opcode
Do you think strlen() is actually called that often? And isn't it a relatively quick function as it is? Just seems like you are optimizing a function that isn't actually called that often and when it is called having a 25% speedup on a function that takes a tiny fraction of the overall execution time isn't going to be noticeable. I wouldn't be against perhaps opcoding some functions, just not sure strlen() would be my first candidate. -Rasmus On Fri, 8 Nov 2002, Andrei Zmievski wrote: I've made a small patch that turns strlen() into a statement executed by the engine instead of a function. The reasoning is that something that integral should probably be in the engine. I haven't done hard benchmarking but it seems to improve performance of that particular piece of code by about 25%. Feedback is welcome. -Andrei http://www.gravitonic.com/ * UNIX, isn't that some archaic form of DOS? - our job applicant * -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] bison error [was: PHP 4.3.0]
I'm not seeing any problems with bison-1.75 here. On Fri, 8 Nov 2002, Dave Viner wrote: here's the message i posted to [EMAIL PROTECTED] for more help in the bison problem. http://www.geocrawler.com/lists/3/GNU/350/0/10107563/ I'm not good enough with bison to understand why it produces no error message and yet does not produce a .c file. even reducing the bison command to its simplest form: Administrator@DVINER-LAP /cygdrive/d/php/php4/Zend $ bison zend_language_parser.y Administrator@DVINER-LAP /cygdrive/d/php/php4/Zend $ ls -l zend_language_parser* -rwxr-xr-x1 Administ None33095 Nov 6 09:56 zend_language_parser.y Administrator@DVINER-LAP /cygdrive/d/php/php4/Zend $ bison zend_ini_parser.y zend_ini_parser.y:215.4-6: unrecognized escape: `\\0' Administrator@DVINER-LAP /cygdrive/d/php/php4/Zend $ ls -l zend_ini_parser* -rwxr-xr-x1 Administ None 6336 Nov 6 09:56 zend_ini_parser.y Administrator@DVINER-LAP /cygdrive/d/php/php4/Zend $ Still fails. The zend_ini_parser produces a warning or error at least. zend_ini_parser.y:215.4-6: unrecognized escape: `\\0' But I'm not good enough with bison to know how to fix it ! dave -Original Message- From: Andi Gutmans [mailto:andi;zend.com] Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 2:34 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PHP-DEV] PHP 4.3.0 Hey, What's the schedule for 4.3? It seems to be lingering. That said I'd like to resolve the bison issue before we release it (i.e. make sure that ZE1 isn't bitten by versions 1.28). Andi -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] MySQL UDF that runs PHP
Cool - will play with it a bit here. On Tue, 5 Nov 2002, David Sklar wrote: Based on Edin Kadribasic's PHP embed SAPI module, I wrote a MySQL UDF that interprets PHP. You can get it here: -- http://www.sklar.com/myphp-0.1.tar.gz I'd be curious for any comments or suggestions folks have. Thanks, David Sklar -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] CVS Account Request: mrioux
libsmbclient is gpl'ed, correct? We cannot accept extensions that are written specifically against a single GPL'ed library. Sorry. -Rasmus On 5 Nov 2002, Martial Rioux wrote: Hi, I Request CVS account to contribute a new extension base on smbclient from SAMBA. This extension is actualy located in php4/ext/smbc, from my developpement tree. Supported functions: smbc_connect smbc_disconnect smbc_open smbc_close smbc_read smbc_write smbc_seek I also made basic documentation and samples scripts using this extension. Thanks for any comments or suggestion for adding this extension to the php cvs tree. PS: By the time your are grant my cvs account other functions will be supported, I Hope! ;-) Best regards, and thanks for your time Martial Rioux -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] Re: apache_hooks
Well, since 99% of the code is the same, I'd be worried about people remembering to merge fixes across. At least if it is ifdef'ed people see the code. But yes, I agree, that's not pretty either. -R On Sun, 3 Nov 2002, George Schlossnagle wrote: Either way works for me. Psychologically, I think it may get higher exposure if it is #ifdef'd, but I have style reservations about doing that. How has this sort of thing been done in the past? Is it undesirable to fork the apache sapi into a new 'apache_hooks' sapi? That may be easiest. George On Saturday, November 2, 2002, at 05:58 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: What do you think would be the best way to make the apache_hooks code more accessible to people? A tarball with the relevant files that overwrites the standard files, or perhaps it is time to #ifdef it into the main branch? -Rasmus // George Schlossnagle // Principal Consultant // OmniTI, Inc http://www.omniti.com // (c) 240.460.5234 (e) [EMAIL PROTECTED] // 1024D/1100A5A0 1370 F70A 9365 96C9 2F5E 56C2 B2B9 262F 1100 A5A0 -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] ODBTP, a possible solution for MS-SQL and otherdatabases
So far 3 people have shown interest in ODBTP, however, it is the weekend. I am currently working on packaging it in a tar.gz file. If the response is low I will only release it to those who have shown an interest, and if it becomes higher than I will release it to the list. It is very important to me that the people who acquire it actually will use it and provide feedback within a reasonable time period. I do not want to feel like I put it in a black hole. I think I am one of the 3 as well, but I am not likely to ever test this. I am fortunate to never have to deal with anything M$, so you won't get any test feedback from me. That doesn't mean I don't think this is cool. I am obviously one that likes new approaches to problems and would encourage you strongly to keep pushing this. If it works well and solves the problem, you are going to get traction. People will start contributing patches and probably extensions for other scripting languages. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] apache_hooks
What do you think would be the best way to make the apache_hooks code more accessible to people? A tarball with the relevant files that overwrites the standard files, or perhaps it is time to #ifdef it into the main branch? -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Console Behavior
flush() On 31 Oct 2002, Adam Voigt wrote: Is this normal? I have: #!/usr/local/php_4.2.3/bin/php -q ?php error_reporting(E_ALL); echo \n\nAttach code? ; $f = fopen(php://stdin,r); $data = fread($f,5); fclose($f); echo \n\n$data\n\n; ? And it refuses to echo Attach code? until after I hit 5 keys on the console and hit enter, when infact it is supposed to be a prompt for the 5 keys (ie, display before you enter the keys) Is this expected? If yes, any workaround?. Adam Voigt [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Console Behavior
Running your code here gives me: 8:27am thinkpad:~ ./foo Attach code? 12345 12345 8:27am thinkpad:~ Seems to work fine. -Rasmus On 31 Oct 2002, Adam Voigt wrote: Now I have this, same behavior as before, maybe I'm using the flush function incorrectly but the manual seems to suggest this is the way to use it: #!/usr/local/php_4.2.3/bin/php -q ?php error_reporting(E_ALL); echo \n\nAttach code? ; flush(); $f = fopen(php://stdin,r); $data = fread($f,5); fclose($f); echo \n\n$data\n\n; ? On Thu, 2002-10-31 at 10:21, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: flush() -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: cvs: php4 / Makefile.global
This is just another example why we should use certain ini. I think we agreed to use certain php.ini, such as php.ini-test. Not setting one by one. There was no such agreement. In fact, for proper testing each test should explicitly define which ini settings it depends on so that we can test for bugs caused by unintended ini setting side-effects. By limiting all tests to run with a known ini environment we are not performing a real-world test. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP-DEV] php/ext/xslt and TSRM
Well, in the threaded case you avoid a rather expensive ts_resource_ex() function call, so what you gain is performance. Functionality should be the same. -Rasmus On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, David Viner wrote: perhaps i'm a bit slow... what is the gain by moving the TSRMLS_FETCH() from functions to having the TSRM params in the php_xslt struct? that is, what functionality or benefit is brought to the extension or the code? Is there something that the extension does not handle properly as it stands? or is the idea simply to remove lots of TSRMLS_FETCH() calls? btw - we should move this discussion from php-dev to sab-php. that's where we're trying to maintain all php/sablotron maintanence issues. dave -Original Message- From: Marcus Boerger [mailto:marcus.boerger;t-online.de] Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 7:38 AM To: Melvyn Sopacua Cc: Sterling Hughes; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; David Viner Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] php/ext/xslt and TSRM At 15:54 30.10.2002, Melvyn Sopacua wrote: At 15:10 30-10-2002, Marcus Boerger wrote: What about removing all TSRMLS_FETCH() and instead passing TSRM parameters in php_xslt struct? Before you do that, I'd rather you wait untill after the weekend - unless there's a compelling reason not too. I'm working on exposure of Sablotron SXP_ functions, and this may alter quite a few things in the files. A complete overhaul of the thread issues is then welcome, but I think David is capable of this also. When it shall be done by me tell me when i can proceed. I suggest a diff to check before comitting would be the way to go with this issue. marcus With kind regards, Melvyn Sopacua ?php include(not_reflecting_employers_views.txt); ? -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Karma for php4 and bcompiler
I'll add the pear karma once I figure out which of his 2 cvs accounts he uses. On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Alan Knowles wrote: Ernani helped out with bcompiler - so karma on that is ok. I think for php4 you will have to send patches to php-dev for the time being. until they get used to you :) Regards Alan Ernani Joppert Pontes Martins wrote: Hi there, with not so much time to dedicate to php improvements and bug fixes I want to have karma to help fix some bugs/improvements into php and into bcompiler for win32 that is my speciallity. I've already did a compile with windows but now I need to add some more functionalities. Alan Knowles already said to me to keep in touch. Thanks, Ernani -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] php_value vs. php_admin_value
admin directives can only be used in the httpd.conf file. Non-admins can be used in both httpd.conf and .htaccess. ie. directives that end-users should not be able to change themselves should be admin ones. -Rasmus On Mon, 21 Oct 2002, Jani Taskinen wrote: Can someone explain what the difference between these 'php_value' and 'php_admin_value' directives is? (and same goes of course for php_flag vs. php_admin_flag..) --Jani -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Forked ext/gd by default
Whoa, pigs are flying over the skating rink in hell. Anybody have some time to go over this and sync things up? On Mon, 21 Oct 2002, Peter Neuman wrote: Hello, Andrei Zmievski [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I think we should use forked version of gd library by default for 4.3.0. From what I hear it is already the best version of any of them out there and if it saves us any more grief, all the better. Objections? +1 BTW: Update to gd-2.0.2 final? See: http://www.boutell.com/gd/ Cu Peter Neuman -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP_AUTH_(USER|PW) not set
As in any Apache mod_auth module. On Sun, 20 Oct 2002, Martin Jansen wrote: On Sat Oct 19, 2002 at 11:0608AM -0700, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: You probably have an external auth module operating on the same request. I don't think so. Could you perhaps be a bit more verbose what you mean with external auth module? -- - Martin Martin Jansen http://martinjansen.com/ -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Idea to extend language: Explicitly setting variablescope inside user defined function (longer)
How in the world do you know that code will run faster ?
Implementing your suggestion would take quite a lot of changes to the
internals of PHP. Instead of just a global and a current symbol table, we
would now need basically an unlimited number of symbol tables and every
variable lookup would become more complex. Ergo it would slow things
down.
-Rasmus
On Mon, 21 Oct 2002, NTPT wrote:
Hi.
I have some idea and suggestion how to extend PHP language a bit in some
way. That may probably lead to increasing of php flexibility, allow more
modular coding to be done etc
My sugestion is simple:
Allow PHP programmer to explicitelly told , WHAT variable scope will be
used inside user defined functions.
In the traditional approach (afaik , i use php 4.2.2 ), as is described in
the manual of php there a diferent varable scopes for each functions , only
syntax global $valuename ; can lead to use variables global. This aproach
is traditional and well known and is sufficient for most tasks.(I say
sufficient, not effective...). My idea is going a bit behind it.
I suggest to introduce new keyword(s) or function(s) into the PHP language
definiton
(i suggest syntax like var_scope scope or var_scope(scope) )
That keywords SHOULD be used in user defined functions to EXPLICITLY
define, WHAT kind of variable scope will be used inside this function.
scope can be either
'local' = it means, that all variables used in this function have a local
scope only.(it means like traditional behavior of php and its variable
scopes until now )
'global' = each variable used in the function is from global scope. Similar
to global $variable_1,$variable_2... $each variable used in the
main execution line of the script
'caller' or 'inherit' This is MOST USEFUL part of the idea . Function
variable scope is the SAME as from where the function was called. (if
functino bar(),with have var_scope set to 'caller', is called from function
foo() it have the same variable scope as function foo(), almost like the
code of function bar() was included (by include something ) somewhere
inside foo() )
A little example code for demonstrating idea of the syntax and how it should
work:
*/
?
$a=10;
echo Varaible $a.$a;
.
$foo_output =foo();
echo brvalue returnded by foo() .$foooutput;
echo brvalue $a after calling foo() but before calling bar() .$a;
$bar_output=bar();
echo brvalue returnded by bar() .$bar_output;
.
.
echo brvalue $a after calling bar() .$a;
function foo()
{
$a=20;
echo $a inside function foo() = .$a
/* $bar_inside foo = bar();
echo Variable $a inside function foo() after calling bar().$a;
*/
.
.
return $a;
}
function bar()
{
var_scope caller // we have the SAME variable scope as from where we are
called
$a=100;
.
.
.
return $a;
}
?
this should return : (with comments behind // )
Varaible $a 10
$a inside function foo() = 20
value returnded by foo() 20
value $a after calling foo() but before calling bar() 10
value returnded by bar() 100
value $a after calling bar() 100 // var_scope is set to 'caller', so $a
in global scope is modified inside bar() the some way, as if global $a was
used )
if you uncomment lines in bar()
Varaible $a 10
$a inside function foo() = 20
Variable $a inside function foo() after calling bar() 100 // var_scope in
function bar() is set to caller, so $a IN SCOPE of foo() ONLY is modified
inside bar().
value returnded by foo() 100
value $a after calling foo() but before calling bar() 10 // var_scope in
function bar() is set to caller, so $a IN GLOBAL SCOPE is NOT modified
inside bar().
value returnded by bar() 100
value $a after calling bar() 100 // var_scope is set to caller, so $a in
global scope is modified inside bar() the some waz, as if global $a was used
For WHAT it could be useful ??
for example for writing a databaze extraction layer of any aplication.
common real life situations are similar like in this example code
(simplified and abstracted from real life code of PHP application I
currently write )
?
.
.
.
.
do something
.
.
.
// now you need a call subroutine
$something=foo('cats','dogs','horses');
.
$different=bar('mices','meat','gras');
.
.
.
.
function foo($data_1,$data_2,$data_3)
{
global $spojeni;
.
.
do something here with $data_1,$data_2,$data_3.
.
.
.
$sqlstring=select * from example_table where mouse_catching='$data1' AND
sniffing='$data_2' AND riding='$data_3'
$result=pg_exec($spojeni,$sqlstring);
// code, that validate if db done that we want, if select return exactly
one line or if there is a some data inconsistrency etc etc. The following
code (wery simplified snipplet from real life situation) is almost the same
inside many of the functions
if ($result)
{
$lines=pg_numrows($result);
if ($lines 1)
{
do something if we have
Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP_AUTH_(USER|PW) not set
You probably have an external auth module operating on the same request.
On Sat, 19 Oct 2002, Martin Jansen wrote:
The following script fails with the todays snapshot and with PHP
4.3.0-pre1:
?php
if (!isset($PHP_AUTH_USER)) {
header(WWW-Authenticate: Basic realm=\Foobar\);
header(HTTP/1.0 401 Unauthorized);
echo Access denied.;
exit;
} else {
echo Hello;
}
?
I looks like $PHP_AUTH_(USER|PW) are not set
properly. Register_globals is set to on, but the same problem also
occurs when setting it to off and using $_SERVER['PHP_AUTH_USER']
then. (Apache 1.3.26, Linux)
Any clues?
--
- Martin Martin Jansen
http://martinjansen.com/
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] short_open_tag
My main worry with such a hack would be breaking a script like this:
?php
function xml() {
echo Hello World;
}
?
...
?xml ()?
...
Now, people generally don't put spaces between the function name and the
(), but it is a BC concern since the above script works just fine today.
One idea would be to only strip ?xml tags up until we see the first PHP
tag. That should cover most cases, but it may be a bit too magical.
-Rasmus
On Thu, 17 Oct 2002, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
They are _not_ the same person!
On Thu, 17 Oct 2002, Zeev Suraski wrote:
Well, I differ with you on that. I don't think there's anything in the
same class as ?xml.
Zeev
At 18:08 17/10/2002, Andi Gutmans wrote:
I don't think we should add special hacks to the scanner. Soon we're going
to have a zillion hacks for other XML/SGML/foobar documents.
Andi
At 12:17 PM 10/16/2002 -0400, Ilia A. wrote:
Since the general consensus by the developers is not to remove the
short_tags
or even disable them. Perhaps we should consider alternate solutions to
this
problem. Given the buzzword popularity of XML and its slowly growing
popularity among website designers (XHTML) this issue is likely to come
up in
the future yet again.
The solution I would like to offer, is a patch that adds special handling
for
?xml. Thus preventing the language parser from attempting to parse data
inside ?xml as PHP source.
Ilia
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
-Andrei http://www.gravitonic.com/
Claiming Java is easier than C++ is like
saying that K2 is shorter than Everest.
-- Larry O'Brien (editor, Software Development)
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] short_open_tag
On Thu, Oct 17, 2002 at 09:43:02AM -0700, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
My main worry with such a hack would be breaking a script like this:
?php
function xml() {
echo Hello World;
}
?
...
?xml ()?
...
The hadler I suggest will no break any old code. Even
?xml_php_function_that_starts_with_xml(); ? will continue to work.
It would only trigger on ?xml[whitespace].
?xml ()? has whitespace.
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] short_open_tag
On Fri, 18 Oct 2002, Andi Gutmans wrote: At 01:09 AM 10/18/2002 +0200, Zeev Suraski wrote: At 18:49 17/10/2002, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: ?xml ()? has whitespace. And I personally think it's a bit pushing it. How likely is it for someone to have a function called xml(), and then call it without a space from the ? tag, and then add a space before the parentheses? I think we can safely ignore that one... I don't see why it's such a big deal for people who are creating xml to turn-off short tags? The big deal is not really XML. It is XHTML and authoring tools that try to be too smart and stick an XML character encoding tag at the top of a file automatically. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] duplicate string, no dupe, ?
I'm trying to optimize some code for an *extremely* busy site. This site has a bunch of data in shared memory to make it available across all the httpd's. I need to provide this data in the form of arrays to user-space PHP through an extension obviously. Rather trivial to do, but my problem is that I need to estrndup() this stuff to make PHP happy. This is slowing me down. If I don't dupe the data then PHP will try to efree() it which is a no-no since this is an external pointer. Instead of a normal array_init(return_value) could I zend_hash_init() my own hash and still set it to be an array but provide my own DTOR function which will not free these pointers? -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] duplicate string, no dupe, ?
On Fri, 18 Oct 2002, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: I'm trying to optimize some code for an *extremely* busy site. This site has a bunch of data in shared memory to make it available across all the httpd's. I need to provide this data in the form of arrays to user-space PHP through an extension obviously. Rather trivial to do, but my problem is that I need to estrndup() this stuff to make PHP happy. This is slowing me down. If I don't dupe the data then PHP will try to efree() it which is a no-no since this is an external pointer. Instead of a normal array_init(return_value) could I zend_hash_init() my own hash and still set it to be an array but provide my own DTOR function which will not free these pointers? Never mind, I had made a dumb mistake in my test code. This approach does work. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Xerces?
There is only Sablotron support. No Xerces. Feel free to contribute the code to support Xerces. -Rasmus On Wed, 16 Oct 2002, Alex Black wrote: Hi all, I have done limited looking but as far as I can tell Xerces is not supported by PHP. A) hopefully I am wrong and just didn't look hard enough. B) If not, any validating parsers that are supported that do DTD validation? It looks like there's an experimental Xalan ext out there, but no Xerces. I have a vague memory of the XML setup being generalized to allow (x) parsers, did that happen, etc? In any case, if there aren't any validating parsers supported by PHP... There should be :) Please respond to the binarycloud-dev list also... Thanks, _alex -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] short_open_tag
I am still +1 on some how getting away from short_open_tag support, if nothing else, to encourage better coding practices (just as we did with turning register_globals off by default). I fail to see how using ?php is better coding practices. Unless you plan on distributing your code to the masses or mixing XML/XHTML without trivially escaping it, I see absolutely no point in using ?php over ?. In reality, very few people intermix PHP and XML. It just doesn't make a whole lot of sense to do so. People tend to keep the two separate and parse the XML from PHP. In the XHTML case, a lot of people mistakenly believe that they must start their documents with an ?xml encoding=...? tag, which if you read the XHTML spec, is actually not necessary. The only use for the XML encoding tag is for XML parsers to get the right character encoding. Browsers, which are typically the target of PHP generated pages, get their character encoding from the Content-type header, or optionally from a similar meta tag. But even if you choose to put in the XML encoding tag, I find it a hell of a lot easier to just put ?echo '?xml encoding=foobar?'? at the top instead of changing hundreds of ? tags to ?php PHP became popular because it eliminated most of the tediousness of writing CGI scripts or low-level Apache modules. If we slowly but surely eliminate all the convenience aspects of PHP we are going to turn the experience back into one of tedium again. PHP is not a pure language. It never will be. The problem it solves is ugly. Ugly problems often require ugly solutions. Solving an ugly problem in a pure manner is bloody hard. PHP's aim is to make solving the web problem easy. Ergo, therefore, Q.E.D, removing all the ugly features of PHP is going to make it harder and harder to use PHP to solve the web problem. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] short_open_tag
The other advantage is to force people one way or the other. In the case of 50% of servers allowing short tags, and the other not... a script using short tags will only work on 50% of PHP installations (just as a script that relies on register_globals will only work on servers with it switched on). Yes, but I don't particularly care what 50% of the servers out there do if I am writing code to solve my problem on my servers. The only way around that problem is: 1. to force short tags on everywhere 2. to force people to use a tagging which is available everywhere No, the way around that problem is to make it configurable. As soon as you force someone to do something, you are imposing a restriction which is going to make it harder for him to solve his problem. As you illustrated, there are some fringe cases where you may want to mix PHP and XML, and in those cases the tool needs to be flexible enough to still be useful. If we forced short tags on, then you couldn't have solved your problem using PHP, so option 1 is out. Option 2 forces people to conform to other peoples' server configurations and to at the same time use much more verbose tagging for the sole reason of making their code work on those other people's servers. If those people have absolutely no inclination to give out their code, why in the world do you want to force them to jump through hoops? We have done our job here. We have educated people and told them that for maximum portability they should use ?php over ?. Forcing the issue further is just going to piss people off without solving any real problem. To continue down this path you have started, there are html authoring tools that want all scripting inside script language=php.../script tags. This tag-style is always on in PHP and is even more portable than ?php ... ?. By your logic this is the tag-style we should be using then? Because if we don't, then there are people who will not be able to edit your scripts in their environments. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [4.3] Current critical bugs
It has been fixed for a while. On Tue, 15 Oct 2002, Peter Neuman wrote: Hi, Andrei Zmievski [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Summary: random error: open_basedir restriction in effect. File is in wrong directory URL: http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=19292 Please Fix this, this is a very big Bug.. Thanks Peter Neuman -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] Ming streams bug
Wez, I think we need to pass a real FILE * into the ming stuff. Take a
look at this segfault:
(gdb) run ming.php
Starting program: /usr/local/bin/php ming.php
FWS%xe HdC
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x403da4d4 in free () from /lib/libc.so.6
(gdb) bt
#0 0x403da4d4 in free () from /lib/libc.so.6
#1 0x403cffe8 in _IO_free_wbackup_area_internal () from /lib/libc.so.6
#2 0x403cdee0 in _IO_seekoff_internal () from /lib/libc.so.6
#3 0x403d269a in fseek () from /lib/libc.so.6
#4 0x40506d82 in SWFInput_file_seek (input=0x8321ae0, offset=0, whence=0) at
input.c:93
#5 0x40506c9e in SWFInput_seek (input=0x8321ae0, offset=0, whence=0) at input.c:52
#6 0x40506d31 in SWFInput_rewind (input=0x8321ae0) at input.c:75
#7 0x40507545 in methodWriteJpegFile (input=0x8321ae0, method=0x4001d610
phpByteOutputMethod, data=0x0)
at jpeg.c:87
#8 0x4050776d in writeSWFJpegBitmapToMethod (block=0x8321b58, method=0x4001d610
phpByteOutputMethod, data=0x0)
at jpeg.c:181
#9 0x40504451 in writeSWFBlockToMethod (block=0x8321b58, method=0x4001d610
phpByteOutputMethod, data=0x0)
at block.c:87
#10 0x404f2ab8 in SWFBlockList_writeBlocksToMethod (list=0x8314480, method=0x4001d610
phpByteOutputMethod,
data=0x0) at blocklist.c:78
#11 0x404f1ed2 in SWFMovie_output (movie=0x832cfd0, method=0x4001d610
phpByteOutputMethod, data=0x0)
at movie.c:262
#12 0x4001d681 in zif_swfmovie_output (ht=0, return_value=0x832da2c,
this_ptr=0x83228d4, return_value_used=0)
at /home/rasmus/php4/ext/ming/ming.c:1432
#13 0x081d8807 in execute (op_array=0x8321104) at
/home/rasmus/php4/Zend/zend_execute.c:1597
#14 0x081c698c in zend_execute_scripts (type=8, retval=0x0, file_count=3) at
/home/rasmus/php4/Zend/zend.c:839
#15 0x0818f622 in php_execute_script (primary_file=0xb880) at
/home/rasmus/php4/main/main.c:1542
#16 0x081de9d6 in main (argc=2, argv=0xb924) at
/home/rasmus/php4/sapi/cli/php_cli.c:695
#17 0x4037d1c4 in __libc_start_main () from /lib/libc.so.6
(gdb) up
#1 0x403cffe8 in _IO_free_wbackup_area_internal () from /lib/libc.so.6
(gdb) up
#2 0x403cdee0 in _IO_seekoff_internal () from /lib/libc.so.6
(gdb) up
#3 0x403d269a in fseek () from /lib/libc.so.6
(gdb) up
#4 0x40506d82 in SWFInput_file_seek (input=0x8321ae0, offset=0, whence=0)
at input.c:93
93if(fseek((FILE *)input-data, offset, whence) == -1)
(gdb) p *(FILE *)input-data
$3 = {_flags = 1930623196, _IO_read_ptr = 0x82308e0
/home/rasmus/php4/Zend/zend_API.c,
_IO_read_end = 0x255 Address 0x255 out of bounds, _IO_read_base = 0x0,
_IO_write_base = 0x82308e0 /home/rasmus/php4/Zend/zend_API.c,
_IO_write_ptr = 0x249 Address 0x249 out of bounds, _IO_write_end = 0x8315030
\022s\017#\b\006\001,
_IO_buf_base = 0x8314380 \022s\017#\b, _IO_buf_end = 0x2c Address 0x2c out of
bounds,
_IO_save_base = 0x8 Address 0x8 out of bounds, _IO_backup_base = 0x7 Address 0x7
out of bounds,
_IO_save_end = 0x0, _markers = 0x0, _chain = 0x0, _fileno = 0, _blksize = 0,
_old_offset = 137446308,
_cur_column = 20156, _vtable_offset = 28 '\034', _shortbuf = \b, _lock =
0x5a01,
_offset = 3066894738570346496, __pad1 = 0x0, __pad2 = 0x83143d0, _mode = 81,
_unused2 = \022s\017#\b, '\0' repeats 15 times, C1\bC1\b , '\0' repeats 18
times}
(gdb) p *(php_stream*)input-data
$7 = {ops = 0x7312f8dc, abstract = 0x82308e0, filterhead = 0x255, filtertail = 0x0,
wrapper = 0x82308e0,
wrapperthis = 0x249, wrapperdata = 0x8315030, fgetss_state = 137446272,
is_persistent = 44,
mode = \b\0\0\0\a\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0, rsrc_id = 0, in_free = 0, fclose_stdiocast
= 0, stdiocast = 0x83143a4,
__exposed = 136072892, __orig_path = 0x5a01 , context = 0x0, flags =
714067076, position = 0,
readbuf = 0x83143d0 \022s\b#\bU\002, readbuflen = 81, readpos = 1930623196,
writepos = 136515520,
chunk_size = 178, eof = 0}
It is casting it to a FILE * and trying to do an fseek, so passing it a
php_stream is bad news here.
-Rasmus
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] Re: Ming streams bug
A. toggle the configure detected value for COOKIE_SEEKER_USES_FPOS_T then recompile. It was undefined. I defined it. B. #undef HAVE_FOPENCOOKIE then recompile. It was defined, I undefined it. Make clean, recompile and try again. Exactly the same segfault. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
