> -Original Message-
> From: Tom Boutell [mailto:t...@punkave.com]
> Sent: Saturday, September 05, 2009 6:30 AM
> To: Marco Tabini
> Cc: Pierre Joye; jani.taski...@iki.fi; Andi Gutmans; Joey Smith;
> internals@lists.php.net
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] shebang skipping in 5.3.0
>
-snip-
> Clas
On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 3:38 PM, Jani Taskinen wrote:
> It's quite relevant. It's actually one of the most important things I tried
> to explain Pierre already. And yes, people still use CGI these days. Not all
> of them have their own webservers running they can configure however they
> wish.
Wel
Marco Tabini wrote:
It would be really nice if everyone could consider that the other do
understand what is being discussed but actually disagree. The question
was actually: is it worth the effort? Who is seriously using CGI (not
meaning fastcgi) with php these days?
On shared hosts, CGI is oft
Pierre Joye wrote:
On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 2:48 PM, Jani Taskinen wrote:
You obviously don't understand at all what this is used for.
Consider the case where you can't change webserver's configs.
Or that you want to quickly test different PHP versions.
What would be easier than simply switching t
Pardon, I do realize everyone remembers CGI, but sometimes it's
important to review the basics, especially when optimized variants are
more popular than the original (but have by no means eliminated it).
Classic CGI has its advantages. It's simple to implement and memory
leaks in individual instan
It would be really nice if everyone could consider that the other do
understand what is being discussed but actually disagree. The question
was actually: is it worth the effort? Who is seriously using CGI (not
meaning fastcgi) with php these days?
On shared hosts, CGI is often the only way to ha
On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 3:12 PM, Tom Boutell wrote:
> Surprisingly, the CGI programming book I wrote in 1995 is relevant to
> this conversation. (:
>
> We're forgetting our history here.
It would be really nice if everyone could consider that the other do
understand what is being discussed but actu
Surprisingly, the CGI programming book I wrote in 1995 is relevant to
this conversation. (:
We're forgetting our history here.
CGI = Common Gateway Interface = web servers running stuff as normal
executables. That means, yes, shebang path support is important!
It's great that modern web servers
On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 2:48 PM, Jani Taskinen wrote:
> You obviously don't understand at all what this is used for.
> Consider the case where you can't change webserver's configs.
> Or that you want to quickly test different PHP versions.
> What would be easier than simply switching the version in
You obviously don't understand at all what this is used for.
Consider the case where you can't change webserver's configs.
Or that you want to quickly test different PHP versions.
What would be easier than simply switching the version in the shebang line?
Quite legitimate and useful to me. And thi
I'm not totally convinced by this argument. CGI is definitively a
different SAPI than CLI and can behave differently. It was a problem
before when we had only one command for both CLI and CGI, but that's
not the case anymore.
We should better document CLI and recommend to always install it shell
u
Andi Gutmans wrote:
> Shebang is for command line scripts (php-cli). It does not make sense to
> support it for Web server scripts. It just adds unnecessary
> code/complexity to that code base. Removing the support from php-cgi was
> really a remnant of the old days when cli and cgi were the same S
It's very legit to use with CGI since you might not be able to run PHP any other
way. So this is definately a bug, CGI should handle it the same as CLI.
The bug report clearly explains it too:
http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=49182
--Jani
Andi Gutmans wrote:
Shebang is for command line scrip
hi Andi,
Can you close (bogus) the bug please? Copy this explanation in there as well :)
Cheers,
On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 5:51 AM, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> Shebang is for command line scripts (php-cli). It does not make sense to
> support it for Web server scripts. It just adds unnecessary
> code/com
14 matches
Mail list logo
