At 06:55 06.01.2003, Jean-Michel Dault wrote:
Le sam 04/01/2003 à 18:13, Marcus Börger a écrit :
What might happen is that CLI becomes widely accepted and scripts
calling php from shebang lines. Id so your above solution is a bad idea
and i hope CLI will be...
I'm CC'ing the maintainers of
This goes with the PHP source approach:
By default, configure/make/make install compiles the CGI interface,
and then you have to make install-cli to get the CLI.
We just replace the make install-cli by urpmi/apt-get php-cli.
Just FYI, 'make install-cli' is not the only way to
install the
Le sam 04/01/2003 à 18:13, Marcus Börger a écrit :
What might happen is that CLI becomes widely accepted and scripts
calling php from shebang lines. Id so your above solution is a bad idea
and i hope CLI will be...
I'm CC'ing the maintainers of PHP for most distributions of Linux, so we
can
At 22:41 03.01.2003, Jean-Michel Dault wrote:
Hello all,
Sorry to re-activate this topic, but I stumbled into an issue when
packaging PHP 4.3 as an RPM for Mandrake.
What happens when a user wants to install *both* php-cli and php-cgi?
You cannot have two files with the same name, either in the
Le sam 04/01/2003 à 08:15, Marcus Börger a écrit :
What happens when a user wants to install *both* php-cli and php-cgi?
You cannot have two files with the same name, either in the same RPM, or
in two different RPMS... This is not RPM specific, since it will create
the same problem with apt,
At 21:57 04.01.2003, Jean-Michel Dault wrote:
Le sam 04/01/2003 à 08:15, Marcus Börger a écrit :
What happens when a user wants to install *both* php-cli and php-cgi?
You cannot have two files with the same name, either in the same RPM, or
in two different RPMS... This is not RPM specific,
What might happen is that CLI becomes widely accepted and scripts
calling php from shebang lines. Id so your above solution is a bad idea
and i hope CLI will be...
That's a minor problem for me, since the shebang is never standard. Some
people put it in /usr/local, some in /opt, some in
Hello all,
Sorry to re-activate this topic, but I stumbled into an issue when
packaging PHP 4.3 as an RPM for Mandrake.
What happens when a user wants to install *both* php-cli and php-cgi?
You cannot have two files with the same name, either in the same RPM, or
in two different RPMS... This
On Fri, 20 Dec 2002, Marcus Börger wrote:
What about uniqid(): http://www.zend.com/zend/week/week116.php#Heading5
I would go for disabling when not available and sending an error
when calling from cygwin without more entropy parameter set to
true. The rest can be fixed for 4.3.1 as it seems
At 23:21 18.12.2002, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Philip Olson wrote:
So every tutorial and documentation on this would have to
say this right?
Ask your sysadmin what the CGI and CLI versions of your
PHP are called, they could be anything as there is no
standard.
At 20:59 18.12.2002, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
What was the consensus on CGI vs. CLI naming or merging issue? Or was
there a consensus at all? I full plan to go ahead with 4.3.0 release
before the end of the year, so those interested in doing anything about
this issue better get their butts in gear.
I think you forgot to take one fact into account - PHP 4.2.x already had
CLI/CGI binaries, both having the same name. Keeping 4.3 with the 4.2
behavior, and then merging the modules back in 4.3.1 is the best solution
as far as I can tell. Merging the modules does not have serious
At 13:23 19.12.2002, Zeev Suraski wrote:
I think you forgot to take one fact into account - PHP 4.2.x already had
CLI/CGI binaries, both having the same name. Keeping 4.3 with the 4.2
behavior, and then merging the modules back in 4.3.1 is the best solution
as far as I can tell. Merging the
-Original Message-
From: Edin Kadribasic [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 3:34 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [PHP-DEV] CGI and CLI (compromise proposal)
After having consulted with Andrei, Derick and others on irc here is
a proposal for a
If my vote has enough Karma Power, then I'm +1 for this solution.
--Wez.
On Thu, 19 Dec 2002, Edin Kadribasic wrote:
After having consulted with Andrei, Derick and others on irc here is
a proposal for a compromise:
On Unix:
1. Both cgi and cli are built as 'php' in their respective sapi
At 15:33 19.12.2002, Edin Kadribasic wrote:
After having consulted with Andrei, Derick and others on irc here is
a proposal for a compromise:
On Unix:
1. Both cgi and cli are built as 'php' in their respective sapi
directories (pretty much as it is today except that cgi gets renamed
back from
This gets my complete support. Let's go ahead with the changes.
On Thu, 19 Dec 2002, Edin Kadribasic wrote:
After having consulted with Andrei, Derick and others on irc here is
a proposal for a compromise:
On Unix:
1. Both cgi and cli are built as 'php' in their respective sapi
Here is the patch against PHP_4_3 that implements the Unix side of
changes.
Edin
On Thu, 19 Dec 2002, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
This gets my complete support. Let's go ahead with the changes.
On Thu, 19 Dec 2002, Edin Kadribasic wrote:
After having consulted with Andrei, Derick and others
Edin Kadribasic wrote:
If this is an acceptable compromise I volunteer to do the changes
required.
Sounds reasonable to me, +1.
--
Sebastian Bergmann
http://sebastian-bergmann.de/ http://phpOpenTracker.de/
Did I help you? Consider a gift:
On Thu, 19 Dec 2002, Edin Kadribasic wrote:
Here is the patch against PHP_4_3 that implements the Unix side of
changes.
Go ahead and apply it. We obviously need RC4 now so commit your critical
fixes to other areas ASAP, because I want to release the RC tonight or
tomorrow.
-Andrei
I'm 95% that PEAR works with cgi, but we should check with Stig to
make sure it doesn't assume that cli will always be installed. Since
pear and cli were both going live with 4.3 they may be coupled.
-adam
On Thu, 19 Dec 2002, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
This gets my complete support. Let's go
Edin,
Are you doing the changes on Win32 also _ If not I'll make the changes.
- Frank
Here is the patch against PHP_4_3 that implements the Unix side of
changes.
Edin
On Thu, 19 Dec 2002, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
This gets my complete support. Let's go ahead with the changes.
: [PHP-DEV] CGI and CLI (compromise proposal)
Edin,
Are you doing the changes on Win32 also _ If not I'll make the changes.
- Frank
Here is the patch against PHP_4_3 that implements the Unix side of
changes.
Edin
On Thu, 19 Dec 2002, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
This gets
After having consulted with Andrei, Derick and others on irc here is
a proposal for a compromise:
On Unix:
1. Both cgi and cli are built as 'php' in their respective sapi
directories (pretty much as it is today except that cgi gets renamed
back from php-cgi to just php).
2. Make install
At 17:53 19.12.2002, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
On Thu, 19 Dec 2002, Edin Kadribasic wrote:
Here is the patch against PHP_4_3 that implements the Unix side of
changes.
Go ahead and apply it. We obviously need RC4 now so commit your critical
fixes to other areas ASAP, because I want to release the
This note from Derick pretty much reflects the idea... it makes sense:
quote
I see that renaming the CGI to php-cgi might break things indeed, and
that's never a good idea. But so is changing the name of the CLI (php)
to something else. It also breaks things, not only for me, but also for
This note from Derick pretty much reflects the idea... it makes sense:
quote
I see that renaming the CGI to php-cgi might break things indeed, and
that's never a good idea. But so is changing the name of the CLI (php)
to something else. It also breaks things, not only for me, but also for
The problems that can occur that I can think of are:
- Crontabs calling the php CLI binary
- CLI scripts starting with #!/usr/bin/php
- Scripts from other languages calling for a specific binary
- and also all the users that call the CLI binary directly by its name.
I agree that the old binary
-Original Message-
From: Sterling Hughes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 9:30 PM
To: Xavier Spriet
Cc: Andrei Zmievski; PHP Developers
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] CGI and CLI
This note from Derick pretty much reflects the idea... it makes sense:
quote
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Sebastian Nohn wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Sterling Hughes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 9:30 PM
To: Xavier Spriet
Cc: Andrei Zmievski; PHP Developers
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] CGI and CLI
This note from Derick
]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 9:30 PM
To: Xavier Spriet
Cc: Andrei Zmievski; PHP Developers
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] CGI and CLI
This note from Derick pretty much reflects the idea... it makes sense:
quote
I see that renaming the CGI to php-cgi might break things indeed
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Xavier Spriet wrote:
Experimental or not, people use it and have developed a need for it.
Many apps out there are based on experimental technology, that's not a
reason to break them all...
So I strongly suggest that whoever has the necessary knowledge on how to
merge CGI
At 03:54 PM 12/18/2002 -0500, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Xavier Spriet wrote:
Experimental or not, people use it and have developed a need for it.
Many apps out there are based on experimental technology, that's not a
reason to break them all...
So I strongly suggest that
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Andi Gutmans wrote:
At 03:54 PM 12/18/2002 -0500, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Xavier Spriet wrote:
Experimental or not, people use it and have developed a need for it.
Many apps out there are based on experimental technology, that's not a
reason to
-Original Message-
From: Derick Rethans [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 9:50 PM
To: Sebastian Nohn
Cc: PHP Developers
Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] CGI and CLI
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Sebastian Nohn wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Sterling Hughes
If it gets done that way it will be really confusing for everyone...
All users used to CLI as php will need to switch to php-cli for
4.3.0 then back to php afterwards ?
I think if there's not enough time to merge both back together, it would
be wiser to wait a bit, at least until it's done if it
I think a lot more users will be pissed of when renaming php to php-cgi than
regarding to the cli-version of php as php-cli or phpsh or anything else.
The best solution would be indeed bundling both to one binary. If this
delays a 4.3.0-release? I don't give a damn about it! The idea release
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Sebastian Nohn wrote:
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Sebastian Nohn wrote:
This note from Derick pretty much reflects the idea... it
makes sense:
quote
I see that renaming the CGI to php-cgi might break things
indeed, and that's never a good idea. But so is
Apache
Group continiously changed their API.
-Original Message-
From: Xavier Spriet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 9:53 PM
To: Sebastian Nohn
Cc: Sterling Hughes; Andrei Zmievski; PHP Developers
Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] CGI and CLI
Experimental
-Original Message-
From: Andi Gutmans [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 10:03 PM
To: Andrei Zmievski; Xavier Spriet
Cc: Sebastian Nohn; Sterling Hughes; PHP Developers
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] CGI and CLI
At 03:54 PM 12/18/2002 -0500, Andrei Zmievski
-Original Message-
From: Derick Rethans [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 10:05 PM
To: Andi Gutmans
Cc: PHP Developers
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] CGI and CLI
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Andi Gutmans wrote:
At 03:54 PM 12/18/2002 -0500, Andrei Zmievski wrote
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Sebastian Nohn wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Derick Rethans [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 10:05 PM
To: Andi Gutmans
Cc: PHP Developers
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] CGI and CLI
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Andi Gutmans wrote
-Original Message-
From: Derick Rethans [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 10:14 PM
To: Sebastian Nohn
Cc: PHP Developers
Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] CGI and CLI
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Sebastian Nohn wrote:
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Sebastian Nohn wrote
: Sterling Hughes; Andrei Zmievski; PHP Developers
Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] CGI and CLI
Experimental or not, people use it and have developed a need for it.
Many apps out there are based on experimental technology, that's not a
reason to break them all...
On Wed, 2002-12-18 at 15:48, Sebastian
-Original Message-
From: Derick Rethans [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 10:20 PM
To: Sebastian Nohn
Cc: Andi Gutmans; PHP Developers
Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] CGI and CLI
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Sebastian Nohn wrote:
-Original Message
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Sebastian Nohn wrote:
But renaming php-cli to php means renaming php to anything else (php-cgi,
cgi-php, phpcgi, phpfoo, whatever), right?
No, we didn't do that for 4.2.[0-3] either:
[root@saturnus php-4.2.1]# ./configure --enable-cli
[root@saturnus php-4.2.1]# make
CGI:
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Derick Rethans wrote:
[...]
I didn't say that it should be changed from php to php-cgi, as I do
think that would be bad.
Derick
Why don't you just add a simple check in the CLI code to exec() the CGI
binary if it is called as a CGI?
if(getenv(GATEWAY_INTERFACE) != NULL)
-Original Message-
From: Xavier Spriet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 10:25 PM
To: Sebastian Nohn
Cc: Sterling Hughes; Andrei Zmievski; PHP Developers
Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] CGI and CLI
On Wed, 2002-12-18 at 16:17, Sebastian Nohn wrote:
Again
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Sebastian Nohn wrote:
I think a lot more users will be pissed of when renaming php to php-cgi than
regarding to the cli-version of php as php-cli or phpsh or anything else.
The best solution would be indeed bundling both to one binary. If this
delays a 4.3.0-release? I
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Sebastian Nohn wrote:
I think a lot more users will be pissed of when renaming php to php-cgi than
regarding to the cli-version of php as php-cli or phpsh or anything else.
The best solution would be indeed bundling both to
Robin Thellend wrote:
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Derick Rethans wrote:
[...]
I didn't say that it should be changed from php to php-cgi, as I do
think that would be bad.
Derick
Why don't you just add a simple check in the CLI code to exec() the CGI
binary if it is called as a CGI?
Derick Rethans wrote:
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Sebastian Nohn wrote:
But renaming php-cli to php means renaming php to anything else
(php-cgi, cgi-php, phpcgi, phpfoo, whatever), right?
No, we didn't do that for 4.2.[0-3] either:
[root@saturnus php-4.2.1]# ./configure --enable-cli
I'm with Shane, that sounds like a really poor idea.
On Wednesday, December 18, 2002, at 04:38 PM, Shane Caraveo wrote:
Robin Thellend wrote:
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Derick Rethans wrote:
[...]
I didn't say that it should be changed from php to php-cgi, as I do
think that would be bad.
Derick
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Sascha Schumann wrote:
The next point release after 4.2.0 was 4.2.1.
There are too many major changes in 4.3 vs. 4.2 to call it a
'point release'.
Semantics.
Especially, there are still significant
backwards compatibility bugs, such as
Plain and simple, and it is the ONLY way that 4.3 can be released.
There is no way in hell I would support the release of PHP with the cli
binary replacing the cgi binary. Change it back to the way it was in
4.2.x since there is no time to properly fix the problem. Leave it
marked
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Andi Gutmans wrote:
I doubt this will happen fast enough. We should just release the way we
released 4.2.x, which as far as I know was php for CGI and php-cli for CLI
or am I a bit behind things? :)
Derick and I hashed it out on IRC and we have a proposal:
We should
I would agree that this is a big problem.
Shane
Andrei Zmievski wrote:
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Sascha Schumann wrote:
The next point release after 4.2.0 was 4.2.1.
There are too many major changes in 4.3 vs. 4.2 to call it a
'point release'.
Semantics.
Especially, there are
Andrei Zmievski wrote:
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Andi Gutmans wrote:
I doubt this will happen fast enough. We should just release the way we
released 4.2.x, which as far as I know was php for CGI and php-cli for CLI
or am I a bit behind things? :)
Derick and I hashed it out on IRC and we have a
So every tutorial and documentation on this would have to
say this right?
Ask your sysadmin what the CGI and CLI versions of your
PHP are called, they could be anything as there is no
standard. For the purpose of this (tutorial|documentation),
we'll call CLI php-cli and CGI php-cgi.
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Philip Olson wrote:
So every tutorial and documentation on this would have to
say this right?
Ask your sysadmin what the CGI and CLI versions of your
PHP are called, they could be anything as there is no
standard. For the purpose of this
Great.
In that case, in order to make things a little smoother for users, could
a little workaround like the one offered by Robin be considered ?
On Wed, 2002-12-18 at 17:21, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Philip Olson wrote:
So every tutorial and documentation on this would
No. At the most, if anything, CLI should output an error message:
if(getenv(GATEWAY_INTERFACE) != NULL) {
printf(This is the PHP CLI binary, please configure your server to
use the correct PHP CGI binary.);
exit(1);
}
Xavier Spriet wrote:
Great.
In that case, in order to make things a
Looks good enough for me, I don't see a problem with that.
On Wed, 2002-12-18 at 17:39, Shane Caraveo wrote:
No. At the most, if anything, CLI should output an error message:
if(getenv(GATEWAY_INTERFACE) != NULL) {
printf(This is the PHP CLI binary, please configure your server to
use
The merging of CLI and CGI will still happen, but in 4.3.1.
I was not under the impression that this decision has been reached. In fact
there were several people strongly opposed to the idea and I'm one of them.
I have several reasons one of them being that having an interpreter which
Andrei Zmievski wrote:
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Andi Gutmans wrote:
I doubt this will happen fast enough. We should just release the way we
released 4.2.x, which as far as I know was php for CGI and php-cli for
CLI
or am I a bit behind things? :)
Derick and I hashed it out on IRC and we
Edin Kadribasic wrote:
* On other platforms, the cgi *is* installed by 'make install' by
default. To install cli something like, 'make install-cli', or
'configure --install-cli=[DIR] --install-cgi=[DIR]' can be used (the
second option would be more usefull for installing both, using both
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Shane Caraveo wrote:
Edin Kadribasic wrote:
[snip]
I really don't understand why insist on cgi being installed on make
install to ${PREFIX}/bin? The solution outlined by Andrei and Derick is
much better IMHO because it will alert users of the issue and because
Cutting down on the list of receipients here...
Philip please do not put this paragraph into the documentation. If
there is any sure fire way to ensure that the latest version of PHP
WON'T be installed on a system... it's to encourage end users to
contact their system administrator.
Although
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Dan Kalowsky wrote:
Cutting down on the list of receipients here...
Philip please do not put this paragraph into the documentation. If
there is any sure fire way to ensure that the latest version of PHP
WON'T be installed on a system... it's to encourage end users to
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Shane Caraveo wrote:
Andrei Zmievski wrote:
Derick and I hashed it out on IRC and we have a proposal:
We should keep 4.2.x behavior with some modifications. CLI and CGI
should always be built unless disabled, and the executables should go
into sapi/cli/php and
On 18 Dec 2002, Xavier Spriet wrote:
Great.
In that case, in order to make things a little smoother for users, could
a little workaround like the one offered by Robin be considered ?
No, as that is a very ugly thing to do IMO.
Derick
--
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Shane Caraveo wrote:
No. At the most, if anything, CLI should output an error message:
if(getenv(GATEWAY_INTERFACE) != NULL) {
printf(This is the PHP CLI binary, please configure your server to
use the correct PHP CGI binary.);
exit(1);
}
Don't forget the
72 matches
Mail list logo
