On Jun 21, 2010, at 10:02 PM, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> At 14:09 21/06/2010, Pierre Joye wrote:
>> Same here.
>>
>> +1 to bundle
>> -1 to enable it by default
>
> Slightly late to the game but my view is the same, +1 to bundle, -1 to enable
> by default.
Is it too late to discuss the topic of lea
At 14:09 21/06/2010, Pierre Joye wrote:
Same here.
+1 to bundle
-1 to enable it by default
Slightly late to the game but my view is the same, +1 to bundle, -1
to enable by default.
Zeev
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub
hi,
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 12:21 AM, Derick Rethans wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Jun 2010, Kalle Sommer Nielsen wrote:
>
>> It seems like theres been enough votes for moving it to the core, is
>> there anyone willing to make that change? Rasmus or Derick? We can
>> always decide whether to enable it by d
Hi
It seems like theres been enough votes for moving it to the core, is
there anyone willing to make that change? Rasmus or Derick? We can
always decide whether to enable it by default afterwards.
As for enabled it by default, I think it should be okay to atleast
enable it as a shared extension b
On Tue, 22 Jun 2010, Kalle Sommer Nielsen wrote:
> It seems like theres been enough votes for moving it to the core, is
> there anyone willing to make that change? Rasmus or Derick? We can
> always decide whether to enable it by default afterwards.
I can do it; but the question is whether we want
Hi!
could anybody tell me why also for every single php file engine must lstat
all path?
Why php engine don't simply try to open directly the file?
There are some places where PHP engine has to know "true" name of the
file - i.e. filename that would be the same for each file regardless of
ho
On 06/21/2010 11:16 PM, Sufficool, Stanley wrote:
> OK, order of operations problem. Remove references, then remove file or no
> one can build. ;-)
It builds allright, check your build.
--
Wbr,
Antony Dovgal
---
http://pinba.org - realtime statistics for PHP
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Dev
>-Original Message-
>From: Pierre Joye [mailto:pierre@gmail.com]
>Sent: Monday, June 21, 2010 12:18 PM
>To: Sufficool, Stanley
>Cc: Ferenc Kovacs; internals@lists.php.net
>Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Safemode Missing?
>
>
>On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 9:16 PM, Sufficool, Stanley
> wrote:
>> OK,
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 9:16 PM, Sufficool, Stanley
wrote:
> OK, order of operations problem. Remove references, then remove file or no
> one can build. ;-)
>
> When will this be complete?
It builds just fine. Be sure to:
- make clean
- buildconf
before trying again :)
Cheers,
>
> On Mon, Jun
OK, order of operations problem. Remove references, then remove file or no one
can build. ;-)
When will this be complete?
-Original Message-
From: tyr...@gmail.com [mailto:tyr...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Ferenc Kovacs
Sent: Monday, June 21, 2010 12:12 PM
To: Sufficool, Stanley
Cc: interna
yes
Tyrael
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 9:09 PM, Sufficool, Stanley <
ssuffic...@rov.sbcounty.gov> wrote:
> Trunk no longer contains main/safe_mode.c
>
> Is this being removed?
>
> make: *** No rule to make target `/php-src/main/safe_mode.c', needed by
> `main/safe_mode.lo'. Stop.
>
> --
> PHP Inter
Trunk no longer contains main/safe_mode.c
Is this being removed?
make: *** No rule to make target `/php-src/main/safe_mode.c', needed by
`main/safe_mode.lo'. Stop.
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>From my point-of-view as a developer (and occasional sysadmin) this is
something which I have been looking forward too for some time so
+1 for including in core
+1 for compiling but not enabling
Marco
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php
On 6/21/10 9:35 AM, Vincenzo D'Amore wrote:
> Thanks Rasmus,
>
> we are using wordpress. Looking at code:
>
> find . -type f -exec grep realpath {} \;
>
> I see a lot of:
>
> if ( function_exists('realpath') )
> $path = realpath($path);
> if ( function_exists('realpath') )
> $path = realpath($p
hi,
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 7:23 PM, Vincenzo D'Amore wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> could anybody tell me why also for every single php file engine must lstat
> all path?
It is done once per paths set and then cached.
> Why php engine don't simply try to open directly the file?
Many reasons, one of
Hello All,
could anybody tell me why also for every single php file engine must lstat
all path?
Why php engine don't simply try to open directly the file?
[pid 13792] lstat("/usr", {st_mode=S_IFDIR|0755, st_size=4096, ...}) = 0
[pid 13792] lstat("/usr/local", {st_mode=S_IFDIR|0755, st_size=4096,
Rasmus,
I have disabled realpath from php.ini,
disable_functions =
passthru,proc_close,proc_get_status,proc_nice,proc,exec,shell_exec,system,proc_open,popen,curl_multi_exec,parse_ini_file,show_source,set_time_limit,error_reporting,mail,fsockopen,ini_set,
*realpath*
And stop and start of apache h
Thanks Ferenc,
there is non Suhosin patch/extension installed.
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 4:52 PM, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
> Check the output of phpinfo()
> should see
> "This server is protected with the Suhosin Patch"
> and/or
> "This server is protected with the Suhosin Extension"
>
> Tyrael
>
> O
Thanks Rasmus,
we are using wordpress. Looking at code:
find . -type f -exec grep realpath {} \;
I see a lot of:
if ( function_exists('realpath') )
$path = realpath($path);
if ( function_exists('realpath') )
$path = realpath($path);
if ( function_exists('realpath') )
$path = realpath($path);
Am 21.06.2010 13:05, schrieb Rob Richards:
> It was already agreed to include it into 6 before so why the need for
> another vote on this just because its a new trunk?
Also eludes me :-)
--
Sebastian BergmannCo-Founder and Principal Consultant
http://sebastian-bergmann.de/
I would like to know why a third party can develop a better (or more agile?)
cache than the core php devs. I would think that if anyone can align it nicely
especially when writing the core code itself and could also think about "this
is a great place for apc to hook in" or something. It's obvio
Check the output of phpinfo()
should see
"This server is protected with the Suhosin Patch"
and/or
"This server is protected with the Suhosin Extension"
Tyrael
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 4:48 PM, Vincenzo D'Amore wrote:
> Hello Oliver,
>
> looking at php.ini configuration I don't see any suhosin ent
Hello Oliver,
looking at php.ini configuration I don't see any suhosin entry, so I think
no.
do you know if there is another way to understand if it is installed?
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Olivier B. wrote:
> Hi,
>
> are you using the "suhosin" patch for PHP ? I can see the same lstat
>
On 06/21/2010 04:32 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> As a PHP user, when moving to PHP 5.3, from 5.2 I had the question
> regarding which accel to use (I had been using APC). From most
> of what I read, APC was not compatible and looking at the APC site,
> the last 'stable' release was ~2years ago with a
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 11:39:30PM -0400, Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
> Stas,
>
> If there is a better alternative to APC we can bundle with PHP, I am
> definitely open to exploring that idea. However the alternatives I am
> familiar either are closed source or have licences incompatible with
> PHP, a
>> Competition between opcode caches for php will definitely be reduced by
>> adding APC into the core,
>> so the market will shrink, of course.
>
>
> i think this is a likely outcome indeed. it might also be phrased in a
> more
> positive tone in that likely efforts will be joined. for example ma
Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
On windows it is even easier, just don't load the dll file, most
extensions other then PCRE (?) are compiled as modules anyway... APC
would be no different, and I would go as far as saying that on Win32
Wincache is probably a better choice.
As long as these are added as
On 19 June 2010 14:23, Kalle Sommer Nielsen wrote:
> What are your views on including APC in the core, or reasons not to?
+1 Added to core
-1 Enabled by default
If APC is not as stable on Windows as required _AND_ licensing issues
are resolvable, could WinCache for Windows be an option? That is
On 21.06.2010, at 13:07, jvlad wrote:
> Competition between opcode caches for php will definitely be reduced by
> adding APC into the core,
> so the market will shrink, of course.
i think this is a likely outcome indeed. it might also be phrased in a more
positive tone in that likely efforts
On 2010-06-19, Kalle Sommer Nielsen wrote:
> Greetings
> What are your views on including APC in the core, or reasons not to?
+1 moving it into core
-1 enabling by default
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Same here.
+1 to bundle
-1 to enable it by default
On 21 Jun 2010 13:05, "Rob Richards" wrote:
Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
>
> I for one think it is a really good idea, there is no compelling
> reaso...
+1 for including APC
-1 for enabling by default
It was already agreed to include it into 6 befo
>> Then is there any reason not to add all code compatible in php license
>> terms
>> into php core?
>
> What are you talking about? Who said that we have to add any php
> licensed code to the core? I only said that the license is a critical
> part of the decision. Nothing else.
APC can be added
Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
I for one think it is a really good idea, there is no compelling
reason not to include APC, I would even go as far as say we should
enable it by default.
+1
+1 for including APC
-1 for enabling by default
It was already agreed to include it into 6 before so why the
On windows it is even easier, just don't load the dll file, most
extensions other then PCRE (?) are compiled as modules anyway... APC
would be no different, and I would go as far as saying that on Win32
Wincache is probably a better choice.
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 2:15 AM, Lester Caine wrote:
> I
hi,
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 12:30 PM, jvlad wrote:
>> This bug is not APC specific.
>>
>
> In this case you can easily point out to another module suffering from this
> bug, don't you?
>
>>> License argument does not work at all.
>>
>> It does, more than ever.
>
> Then is there any reason not to
> This bug is not APC specific.
>
In this case you can easily point out to another module suffering from this
bug, don't you?
>> License argument does not work at all.
>
> It does, more than ever.
Then is there any reason not to add all code compatible in php license terms
into php core?
If no
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 11:55 AM, jvlad wrote:
>>> keep on the topic pls, which is the inclusion of potentially buggy and
>>> poorly maintained APC.
>>
>> I'm on topic. You seem to be able to fix this bug very easily, I only
>> told you how to provide patches.
>
> I do not care of bugs in APC unle
>> keep on the topic pls, which is the inclusion of potentially buggy and
>> poorly maintained APC.
>
> I'm on topic. You seem to be able to fix this bug very easily, I only
> told you how to provide patches.
I do not care of bugs in APC unless this module is NOT in php core.
If they appear in php
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 11:31 AM, jvlad wrote:
> keep on the topic pls, which is the inclusion of potentially buggy and
> poorly maintained APC.
I'm on topic. You seem to be able to fix this bug very easily, I only
told you how to provide patches.
APC is well maintained but all I can read from
>>>
>>> By the way, including APC in the core is actually likely to fix this
>>> problem because it has to do with the order the rshutdown functions are
>>> called. Read Christian's excellent description of the problem here:
>>>
>>> http://news.php.net/php.internals/46999
>>>
>>> -Rasmus
>>
>> conc
>> This is an unfixed PHP bug. There have been a number of threads about
>> the object destruction order on internals. It isn't just APC that is
>> affected by this. Other extensions are affected as well.
>
> I understand that this effect is caused by the fact that APC destroys PHP
> classes ea
hi,
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 10:58 AM, jvlad wrote:
>
> "Rasmus Lerdorf" wrote in message
> news:4c1ed90d.2030...@lerdorf.com...
>> On 6/20/10 7:44 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
>>> Hi!
>>>
Can you elaborate? What "average user"-facing features are non-obvious?
We should document them if not
"Rasmus Lerdorf" wrote in message
news:4c1ed90d.2030...@lerdorf.com...
> On 6/20/10 7:44 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>>> Can you elaborate? What "average user"-facing features are non-obvious?
>>> We should document them if nothing else.
>>
>> This recently caught my attention:
>> http://
So.. Commit? :)
-Hannes
On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 05:05, Eric Stewart wrote:
> Wrote up and attempted to commit a news announcement for TestFest 2010, only
> to find out I don't have karma for that section of the repository. I've
> attached the entry XML file if someone would be kind enough to comm
>
> "Ilia Alshanetsky" wrote in message
> news:aanlktilzlbbfucuv-jtmkm-qljl1il7wsqy0fyhn3...@mail.gmail.com...
> Including into core of PHP has no impact on other opcode caches, if
> they do a better job then APC, people can definitely (and should) use
> them. The main purpose of including APC wo
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 8:15 AM, Lester Caine wrote:
> Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
>>
>> The test was done on Windows... I never said it was IIS only, it is
>> however
>> win32 only.
>
> Sorry - Most people using it will no have bought win64 yet was the point and
> the
> test was done on win32 as far
2010/6/21 Sebastian Bergmann :
> Am 20.06.2010 20:21, schrieb Ilia Alshanetsky:
>> I for one think it is a really good idea, there is no compelling
>> reason not to include APC, I would even go as far as say we should
>> enable it by default.
>
> +1 for bundling
> +1 for removing the "layer of ch
Am 21.06.2010 09:33, schrieb Ferenc Kovacs:
> What's the problem with moo?
You are not seriously asking that question, are you?
--
Sebastian BergmannCo-Founder and Principal Consultant
http://sebastian-bergmann.de/ http://thePHP.cc/
--
PHP Intern
On 21.06.2010, at 05:32, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> This is an unfixed PHP bug. There have been a number of threads about
>> the object destruction order on internals. It isn't just APC that is
>> affected by this. Other extensions are affected as well.
>
> I understand that this effect
What's the problem with moo?
Tyrael
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 8:49 AM, Sebastian Bergmann <
s...@sebastian-bergmann.de> wrote:
> Am 20.06.2010 23:07, schrieb Rasmus Lerdorf:
> > No, it is not enough to just have source code. The developers need to
> > play along as well.
>
> Which reminds me: do
50 matches
Mail list logo
