hi Jan, On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 10:42 PM, Jan Ehrhardt <php...@ehrhardt.nl> wrote: > "Anatol Belski" in php.internals (Thu, 25 Apr 2013 22:11:02 +0200): >>On Thu, April 25, 2013 21:46, Jan Ehrhardt wrote: >>> The difference probably is that you built libssh2 as shared. Your >>> php_ssh2.dll's are dependent on libssh2.dll (which in its turn is dependent >>> on the ssl-dll's). >>> >>> My build is static: it can do without libssh2.dll and only relies on the >>> ssl-dll's. >> >>Ok, that explains it. Then your fix should be conditional depending on >>ssh2 ext being built shared or static. You could that to the github repo. > > No, it does not make any difference if the ssh extension is built shared > or static. The difference concerns libssh2_a.lib. Does libssh2_a.lib > rely on the exiatence of libssh2.dll or not
<lib>_a means a static library (our naming convention), there will be no dynamic link with libssh2. > not. Both rely directly or indirectly on libeay32.dll. > > From my snapshot.txt: > > Module: php_ssh2.dll > =========================== > libeay32.dll > msvcr110.dll > > AFAIK there is no easy fix for this. Windows dependency walker can > detect the difference, but I doubt if other tools can do it. It does not detect libssh2 because it is statically linked already, threre is no dll dep with libssh2 in this case. However both SSL DLLs should be listed as far as I remember. But I've to double check that again, if both are actually used by ssh2. About how builds are done exactly, everything is on github. You can co them and reproduce what we use or do. That would be actually a very good thing if you would do that. Sharing work would be more efficient and error prone for every of us instead of doing everything from scratch again. It will also avoid non valid bug reports because someone uses different builds (with different configuration or invalid CRTs versions). Cheers, -- Pierre @pierrejoye -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
