I have it on the BSDs and Solaris too.
But most people don't. It doesn't come in as a standard in most
operating
systems.
ok, point for you Zeev, but Emile did not say, you should stop
delivering .tar.gz, but in addition offer this .bz2 thing. So
why not, if at least those modem-users
Wolfgang Drews wrote:
delivering .tar.gz, but in addition offer this .bz2 thing. So
why not, if at least those modem-users would benefit of it?
Could benefit, not would benefit. They'd need to download and install
bzip2
first.
Emile
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To
delivering .tar.gz, but in addition offer this .bz2 thing. So
why not, if at least those modem-users would benefit of it?
Could benefit, not would benefit. They'd need to download and install
bzip2 first.
yes, sorry for this one (my english is especially on tuesday mornings
very
Guys, I didn't put any words in Emile's mouth. I know he didn't suggest
stopping to distribute .gz files. I was just describing the full 'logical
path' to why I don't think that using bzip2 is a very hot
idea. Essentially I was saying (a) We can't give up .gz/.zip (b) .bz2
isn't all that
what do people think about a PHP 4.0.5 release?
We have about 70 change entries in NEWS. Some of the changes
are fundamentally needed for some extensions to work
correctly or to compile at all.
mh..
what about php-gtk?
is it going to be included in release?
im not sure if
On Mon, Feb 19, 2001 at 09:31:01AM +0100, Sascha Schumann wrote:
Hi,
what do people think about a PHP 4.0.5 release?
We have about 70 change entries in NEWS. Some of the changes
are fundamentally needed for some extensions to work
correctly or to compile at all.
Cameron wrote:
i'll agree its about due for release, can we do SOMETHING about the download
size tho? i dont really have any ideas on decent ways to shrink it but it
seems to be bloating to me. could do with the mcrypt fix's and zeev's output
buffer fix 1st tho . . .
Hum, having just
I would welcome the win32 distributions packed with bzip2
as well. This algorithm is superior to anything else I know
(well, at least in compression ratio), and is available to
win32 users as well. Not only as a commandline tool, but as
a plugin for the very popular wincmd32 too. Anything
Cameron wrote:
since sending this email i have been thinking a lot about it. bzip2 is fine for
many sys admins but we have the problem of the redhat users (dont take this the
wrong way please) that have used no other distributions and have only ever
installed an rpm before, for these users
any other suggestions?
There has been talk on here, or maybe on the QA list about a web page where
you tick the items you want, and just download the necessary components.
Maybe this was just in the context of PEAR - I can't remember. Anyway, is
anyone working on this? It seems to be a good
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Cynic wrote:
I would welcome the win32 distributions packed with bzip2
as well. This algorithm is superior to anything else I know
(well, at least in compression ratio), and is available to
win32 users as well. Not only as a commandline tool, but as
a plugin for the
Phil Driscoll wrote:
any other suggestions?
There has been talk on here, or maybe on the QA list about a web page where
you tick the items you want, and just download the necessary components.
Maybe this was just in the context of PEAR - I can't remember. Anyway, is
anyone working on this?
Cameron wrote:
Phil Driscoll wrote:
There has been talk on here, or maybe on the QA list about a web page where
you tick the items you want, and just download the necessary components.
that is pretty simple, make the client who is compiling the source do a
./buildconf first. if noone is
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote:
we had a related idea to not include extensions considered experimental
like ext/zziplib that marked by an EXPERIMENTAL file in their ext dir
I'm not a supporter of this, the Sablotron is marked EXPERIMENTAL, but it
should definitely be in the
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Derick Rethans wrote:
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Sascha Schumann wrote:
what do people think about a PHP 4.0.5 release?
Let me know your thoughts.
Sounds like a good idea, but I would like to fix the bugs in the mcrypt
extension before this release. What about
At 15:05 19.2. 2001, Derick Rethans wrote the following:
--
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Cynic wrote:
I would welcome the win32 distributions packed with bzip2
as well. This algorithm is superior to anything else I know
(well, at least in
Hum, having just contributed to said download size... we've done our
best to
minimize the KLOC, removing some cruft and moving a couple of functions
into
a (separate) library, but we'd be down to stripping comments to go
further...
the only other thing I could suggest is using bzip2
Can we propose extensions outside of the main distribution ?
I like the idea of downloading what you want.
Through a form, you would chose the extensions you need, then submit and
receive a custom GZIP or BZ2 file.
It sounds doable. Any constraint, dependency to work out ? Yes, the m4
"Hellekin O. Wolf" wrote:
Can we propose extensions outside of the main distribution ?
I like the idea of downloading what you want.
Through a form, you would chose the extensions you need, then submit and
receive a custom GZIP or BZ2 file.
It sounds doable. Any constraint, dependency
At 09:31 AM 2/19/2001 +0100, Sascha Schumann wrote:
Hi,
what do people think about a PHP 4.0.5 release?
We have about 70 change entries in NEWS. Some of the changes
are fundamentally needed for some extensions to work
correctly or to compile at all.
Let me know
I want to fix chunked output buffering for 4.0.5 (it doesn't work right at
all in 4.0.4). I think it'll take me about 10 days (I'll probably not have
time to work on it this week).
About bzip2 - my personal opinion is that we should probably not bother
with it. It's slower and it's much
I want to fix chunked output buffering for 4.0.5 (it doesn't work right
at all in 4.0.4). I think it'll take me about 10 days (I'll probably
not have time to work on it this week).
glad to hear this, I think this is *definitely* worth waiting... :)
andr
--
Andr Langhorstt: +49
At 07:51 20/2/2001, Emiliano wrote:
Zeev Suraski wrote:
About bzip2 - my personal opinion is that we should probably not bother
with it. It's slower and it's much less standard (there's a world beyond
Linux, remember).
I have it on the BSDs and Solaris too.
But most people don't. It
I'm not sure what all has been suggested, so sorry if this has been already.
Why not just make a simple form and avoid clutter completely? (ie all the
links)
Could allow them to choose source/binary, os, PHP version, compression
format, etc.
Chris Newbill
Zeev Suraski wrote:
About bzip2 -
24 matches
Mail list logo
