Re: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

At 17:24 03/05/2002, Jim Winstead wrote: >Zeev Suraski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > We could add it. I just hope people wouldn't start demanding control > > structures in there to start selectively loading other files... > >let's just hope that by then, someone realizes we already have a >scanne

RE: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

> Pierre-Alain Joye wrote: > >>Seriously, being able to include other ini files is a great feature, > >>especially for hosters who will then be able to set up site-wide config > >>files that are included from per-vhost config files, etc. You can have > >>your cake and eat it too. > > > > Sure :).

Re: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

There's no reason to not put in the bin-dir solution now. I just would like to see an eventual full solution to the issue. Zeev Suraski wrote: > IMHO, the enemy of the good is the better. > We can implement the binary-dir solution in no time, and it covers >95% > of the problems easily, but in

Re: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

Joseph Tate wrote: >>Well, you are correct that the size of the executable is irrelevant, but >>having different instances of PHP means less shared pages when multiple >>copies are loaded. There is a definite advantage to having a single httpd >>binary that is the same for everyone when it comes

Re: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

Pierre-Alain Joye wrote: >>Seriously, being able to include other ini files is a great feature, >>especially for hosters who will then be able to set up site-wide config >>files that are included from per-vhost config files, etc. You can have >>your cake and eat it too. > > Sure :). > A way to m

Re: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

Zeev Suraski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > We could add it. I just hope people wouldn't start demanding control > structures in there to start selectively loading other files... let's just hope that by then, someone realizes we already have a scanner and parser that handles such a language close

RE: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

> Well, you are correct that the size of the executable is irrelevant, but > having different instances of PHP means less shared pages when multiple > copies are loaded. There is a definite advantage to having a single httpd > binary that is the same for everyone when it comes to runtime memory >

RE: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

> This is true, there will be less shared pages. I *want* this! > (Though I was talking about PHP and not httpd). Well, they are commonly one and the same. But I guess you are on a Windows/CGI platform? This doesn't really apply there. -Rasmus -- PHP Development Mailing List

RE: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

From: Rasmus Lerdorf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Well, you are correct that the size of the executable is irrelevant, but > having different instances of PHP means less shared pages when multiple > copies are loaded. There is a definite advantage to having a single httpd > binary that is the sam

RE: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

Well, you are correct that the size of the executable is irrelevant, but having different instances of PHP means less shared pages when multiple copies are loaded. There is a definite advantage to having a single httpd binary that is the same for everyone when it comes to runtime memory usage. -

RE: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

From: Zeev Suraski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > IMHO, the enemy of the good is the better. > We can implement the binary-dir solution in no time, and it covers >95% of > the problems easily, but instead we'll be discussing perfect solutions and > end up doing nothing :) Yes, please! :) Remembe

RE: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

At 07:51 03/05/2002, Stig S. Bakken wrote: >Edin and I were discussing ini files on IRC last night and the same idea >came up. With the exact same syntax too, actually. This is divine >proof that the include_ini is good and must be implemented. :-) > >Seriously, being able to include other ini f

Re: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

IMHO, the enemy of the good is the better. We can implement the binary-dir solution in no time, and it covers >95% of the problems easily, but instead we'll be discussing perfect solutions and end up doing nothing :) My 2 agorot. Zeev At 08:03 03/05/2002, Markus Fischer wrote: > Hi, > >

RE: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

> Seriously, being able to include other ini files is a great feature, > especially for hosters who will then be able to set up site-wide config > files that are included from per-vhost config files, etc. You can have > your cake and eat it too. Sure :). A way to make this functionnality on other

Re: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

Hi, but including other INI files at this stage is only of real advantage if we can also conditionally include it, no? Like, depending on the version too. How about looking for the version number in the filename too first, e.g.: php-apache-4.2.1.ini php-a

Re: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

On Thu, 2002-05-02 at 21:18, Shane Caraveo wrote: > Zeev Suraski wrote: > > Does anybody have an opinion about this? > > Of course! ;) > > ini search order > 1. PHP_BIN_DIR (\php\) > 2. OS_DIR (\winnt\) > > To fix the ini issue we need more than just this. The best I can come > up with right

RE: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

On Thu, 2002-05-02 at 19:07, Preston L. Bannister wrote: > From: Andi Gutmans [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > At 14:44 02/05/2002 +0300, Zeev Suraski wrote: > > >At 14:00 02/05/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >>On Thu, 2 May 2002, Zeev Suraski wrote: > > >> > > >> > At 13:36 02/05/2002, [EM

Re: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

Zeev Suraski wrote: > On Thu, 2 May 2002, Shane Caraveo wrote: > > >>#4 is realy needed for systems running virtual servers under IIS. While >>you can configure ini in the registry, it's a pain, especially if you >>want to give users access to edit their own ini file, or you want >>different

Re: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

On Thu, 2 May 2002, Shane Caraveo wrote: > #4 is realy needed for systems running virtual servers under IIS. While > you can configure ini in the registry, it's a pain, especially if you > want to give users access to edit their own ini file, or you want > different extensions loaded for diff

Re: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

At 13:14 02/05/2002 -0700, Shane Caraveo wrote: >Andi Gutmans wrote: > > Isn't this all a bit of an overkill? > > > > Andi > >#5 probably is, it's a nicety, but I think the other items are relatively >necessary unless you are dependent entirely on Apache, which provides >extensive configurabilit

Re: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

Andi Gutmans wrote: > Isn't this all a bit of an overkill? > > Andi #5 probably is, it's a nicety, but I think the other items are relatively necessary unless you are dependent entirely on Apache, which provides extensive configurability. #1 would allow scripts that only are used on 'comman

Re: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

Isn't this all a bit of an overkill? Andi At 12:18 02/05/2002 -0700, Shane Caraveo wrote: >Zeev Suraski wrote: >>Does anybody have an opinion about this? > >Of course! ;) > >ini search order >1. PHP_BIN_DIR (\php\) >2. OS_DIR (\winnt\) > >To fix the ini issue we need more than just this. The be

Re: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

Zeev Suraski wrote: > Does anybody have an opinion about this? Of course! ;) ini search order 1. PHP_BIN_DIR (\php\) 2. OS_DIR (\winnt\) To fix the ini issue we need more than just this. The best I can come up with right now is: 1. implement bang line parsing. This way, a specific script ca

Re: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

Preston L. Bannister wrote: > From: Andi Gutmans [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > >>At 14:44 02/05/2002 +0300, Zeev Suraski wrote: >> >>>At 14:00 02/05/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>> On Thu, 2 May 2002, Zeev Suraski wrote: >At 13:36 02/05/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >>>

RE: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

From: Andi Gutmans [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > At 14:44 02/05/2002 +0300, Zeev Suraski wrote: > >At 14:00 02/05/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >>On Thu, 2 May 2002, Zeev Suraski wrote: > >> > >> > At 13:36 02/05/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> > >Some hosters use this feature to have dif

Re: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

At 14:44 02/05/2002 +0300, Zeev Suraski wrote: >At 14:00 02/05/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>On Thu, 2 May 2002, Zeev Suraski wrote: >> >> > At 13:36 02/05/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> > >Some hosters use this feature to have different settigns for different >> > >customers... >> > >> > Do

RE: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

From: Zeev Suraski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > At 15:09 02/05/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Ok then, perhaps we should have an .ini setting for it? :) > > > >So you want to add an .ini setting where the .ini file could be found? > >That just doesn't make sense to me :) > > That was a j

Re: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

At 15:09 02/05/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Ok then, perhaps we should have an .ini setting for it? :) > >So you want to add an .ini setting where the .ini file could be found? >That just doesn't make sense to me :) That was a joke.. > > The only two options I see, in that case are: > > >

Re: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

I'm in favour of looking for php.ini in the same dir as the executeable module - as in the path part of GetModuleFileName(), so it will work for DLL as well as EXE versions. I'm a bit dubious of using the registry for configuring PHP, particularly when multiple installations/versions are present;

Re: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

On Thu, 2 May 2002, Zeev Suraski wrote: > At 14:00 02/05/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >On Thu, 2 May 2002, Zeev Suraski wrote: > > > > > At 13:36 02/05/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > >Some hosters use this feature to have different settigns for different > > > >customers... > > > > > >

RE: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

> At the risk of getting toasted out of the water... do any serious hosters > use a Win32 enviroment to host on? (who would utilise this way of setting > different settings for different clients) Intranet applications using (d)com, mssql run on win NT/2K. > Are there any poll's we could referenc

Re: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

We're not necessarily talking about Win32... Zeev At 14:02 02/05/2002, Dan Hardiker wrote: >At the risk of getting toasted out of the water... do any serious hosters >use a Win32 enviroment to host on? (who would utilise this way of setting >different settings for different clients) > >Are there

Re: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

At 14:00 02/05/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >On Thu, 2 May 2002, Zeev Suraski wrote: > > > At 13:36 02/05/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >Some hosters use this feature to have different settigns for different > > >customers... > > > > Do you know this for a fact, or is this an estimate? > >T

Re: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

At the risk of getting toasted out of the water... do any serious hosters use a Win32 enviroment to host on? (who would utilise this way of setting different settings for different clients) Are there any poll's we could reference against of PHP users (on Win32 enviroments) and what they use it fo

Re: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

On Thu, 2 May 2002, Zeev Suraski wrote: > At 13:36 02/05/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >Some hosters use this feature to have different settigns for different > >customers... > > Do you know this for a fact, or is this an estimate? This is a fact, some hoster here in .nl uses it. Derick --

Re: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

At 13:36 02/05/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Some hosters use this feature to have different settigns for different >customers... Do you know this for a fact, or is this an estimate? Zeev -- PHP Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.p

Re: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

On Thu, 2 May 2002, Zeev Suraski wrote: > Does anybody have an opinion about this? > If we go for that solution, should we remove the CWD lookup? My personal > belief is that we should, but it may have to do with my perception of what > this feature is useful for. Other people may be using th

Re: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

Does anybody have an opinion about this? If we go for that solution, should we remove the CWD lookup? My personal belief is that we should, but it may have to do with my perception of what this feature is useful for. Other people may be using the CWD lookup for different things. (Note: it's

[PHP-DEV] [PATCH] RE: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

From: Zeev Suraski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > At 23:11 01/05/2002, Shane Caraveo wrote: > >That would only solve that particular situation, what about multiple > >installations of the same version, or seperate configurations for the same > >installation? > > We can have PHP look for php.in

Re: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

At 23:11 01/05/2002, Shane Caraveo wrote: >That would only solve that particular situation, what about multiple >installations of the same version, or seperate configurations for the same >installation? We can have PHP look for php.ini in the directory where php.exe is located. This would all

Re: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

Daniel Beulshausen wrote: > At 11:41 01.05.2002 -0700, Shane Caraveo wrote: > >> Daniel Beulshausen wrote: >> >>> At 11:19 01.05.2002 -0700, Shane Caraveo wrote: >>> >> > they should be changed to use the windows registry anyway... >> >> Feel free to do it :) > > > >

Re: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

At 11:41 01.05.2002 -0700, Shane Caraveo wrote: >Daniel Beulshausen wrote: >>At 11:19 01.05.2002 -0700, Shane Caraveo wrote: >> > > they should be changed to use the windows registry anyway... > > Feel free to do it :) this isn't going to be a big task, i'll put it onto

Re: [PHP-DEV] config.w32.h...registry configuration

Daniel Beulshausen wrote: > At 11:19 01.05.2002 -0700, Shane Caraveo wrote: > > > they should be changed to use the windows registry anyway... Feel free to do it :) >>> >>> >>> this isn't going to be a big task, i'll put it onto my todo. >> >> >> It's already done, been there fo