On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 12:40 PM, Rowan Collins <rowan.coll...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 06/09/2016 11:18, Derick Rethans wrote: > >> One of PHPs biggest strengths is the availability of an extension for >> nearly everything. There are *1000s* out there. Some made by single >> people, some by small groups of people, or some by large companies. You >> can't expect *all* of these extensions to be available through >> distribution's packages. >> > > By the same reasoning, most of them won't be available on pecl.php.net > either. I'm curious, do people often run their own PECL-compatible > "channel" servers? in the past it was a pita so nobody really done it, but then Fabien contributed Pirum (http://pirum.sensiolabs.org/) after that for a while it was "hip" to run your own pear channel(from server/channel side pear and pecl is the same). nowdays most active projects switched from custom pear channels to composer/packagist > > > They'd still need to run the equivalent to "pecl" to install these >> manually build extensions. Or at least the "pecl download" variant. >> > > Not really, the ones I've used come as a tarball, use "phpize" and > standard build tools, and have a "make install" to put the .so file in the > right place. Then you just have to add "extension=foo.so" in the > appropriate ini location (which you have to do after pecl install anyway). > > I agree that a stable tool for installing from pecl.php.net should always > be included, though. agree, and on windows we could dramatically improve the situation, afair Anatol recently added the capability for peclweb to link/list the windows binaries for the pecl releases, and pickle uses the dll-s from windows.php.net to be able to install the pecl extensions without requiring the build toolchain to be present: https://github.com/FriendsOfPHP/pickle/blob/71fd8a97ac6c3f67fbb7f032533ddaa31cb6b662/src/Package/Util/Windows/DependencyLib.php -- Ferenc Kovács @Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu
