>
>
> >> 100-recode_is_shared.patch
> >> The conflict between MySQL and recode should only happen with an old
> >> libmysql (3.23?) not sure about imap ... but in your case the patch
> >> might make sense, while I won't directly apply it to our tree as
> >> usually people will build extensi
On Sat, 16 Jan 2010, Raphael Geissert wrote:
> > use_embedded_timezonedb.patch
> > Like with the SQLite note above we prefer to have the same behavior
> > over all platforms by using a common time database.
>
> Same here, updating the tz data on PHP everytime would be a pain. And yes,
> at s
Raphael Geissert wrote:
> Johannes Schlüter wrote:
>
> Although I would have preferred you wait for me to submit each patch
> individually with enough information (because I've only been like two
> years co-maintaining the packages and most patches were added by others,
> and most before I joined)
Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
>>
>> You can read this thread about my attempts to create a portable autoconf
>> setup that works both in autoconf-2.60+ and previous versions. There
>> were various ideas, but in the end none of them proved to be reliable.
>>
>> We need diversions
Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> Raphael Geissert wrote:
>> Gwynne Raskind wrote:
>>> Though I thought the use of high-numbered diversions was
>>> actually a supported thing - or was that only in 2.13?
>>>
>> That argument is not supported by the autoconf manual. Please see the
>> discussion at
>> http://b
Raphael Geissert wrote:
> Gwynne Raskind wrote:
>> Though I thought the use of high-numbered diversions was
>> actually a supported thing - or was that only in 2.13?
>>
>
> That argument is not supported by the autoconf manual. Please see the
> discussion at
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugre
Gwynne Raskind wrote:
>
> Though I thought the use of high-numbered diversions was
> actually a supported thing - or was that only in 2.13?
>
That argument is not supported by the autoconf manual. Please see the
discussion at
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=542906#10
Cheers,
-
Jani Taskinen wrote:
> On 01/17/2010 05:19 AM, Raphael Geissert wrote:
>> Jani Taskinen wrote:
>>
>>> 16.1.2010 20:10, Raphael Geissert wrote:
Some of the other patches include:
libdb_is_-ldb
>>>
>>> Why? Potentially breaks things when you assume db/ being correct place..
>>
>> Do you ha
On Jan 18, 2010, at 3:51 AM, Jani Taskinen wrote:
>> Can you tell me what exactly we are breaking? divert calls should only be
>> used internally by autoconf and the, apparently useless, usage of them in
>> php makes it fail to build with any other autoconf.
> If you remove them, things break. I do
Jani Taskinen wrote:
> On 01/17/2010 05:19 AM, Raphael Geissert wrote:
>> Jani Taskinen wrote:
>>
>>> 16.1.2010 20:10, Raphael Geissert wrote:
Some of the other patches include:
libdb_is_-ldb
>>>
>>> Why? Potentially breaks things when you assume db/ being correct place..
>>
>> Do you hav
On 01/17/2010 05:19 AM, Raphael Geissert wrote:
Jani Taskinen wrote:
16.1.2010 20:10, Raphael Geissert wrote:
Some of the other patches include:
libdb_is_-ldb
Why? Potentially breaks things when you assume db/ being correct place..
Do you have an example of any actual case?
Do you have a
Raphael Geissert wrote:
> Can you tell me what exactly we are breaking? divert calls should only be
> used internally by autoconf and the, apparently useless, usage of them in
> php makes it fail to build with any other autoconf.
Have a look in the archives. I tried getting the divert stuff wor
Jani Taskinen wrote:
> 16.1.2010 20:10, Raphael Geissert wrote:
>> Some of the other patches include:
>> libdb_is_-ldb
>
> Why? Potentially breaks things when you assume db/ being correct place..
Do you have an example of any actual case?
>
>> 115-autoconf_ftbfs.patch
>
> Hell no. You're brea
17.1.2010 0:29, Alexey Zakhlestin wrote:
On 17.01.2010, at 1:05, Gwynne Raskind wrote:
On Jan 16, 2010, at 4:18 PM, Jani Taskinen wrote:
115-autoconf_ftbfs.patch
Hell no. You're breaking the configure again with this crap. I already reverted
the idiocy once, don't even think about doing thi
On 17.01.2010, at 1:05, Gwynne Raskind wrote:
> On Jan 16, 2010, at 4:18 PM, Jani Taskinen wrote:
>>> 115-autoconf_ftbfs.patch
>> Hell no. You're breaking the configure again with this crap. I already
>> reverted the idiocy once, don't even think about doing this shit again. PHP
>> configure wo
On Jan 16, 2010, at 4:18 PM, Jani Taskinen wrote:
>> 115-autoconf_ftbfs.patch
> Hell no. You're breaking the configure again with this crap. I already
> reverted the idiocy once, don't even think about doing this shit again. PHP
> configure works properly only with autoconf-2.13 which was the las
16.1.2010 20:10, Raphael Geissert wrote:
Some of the other patches include:
libdb_is_-ldb
Why? Potentially breaks things when you assume db/ being correct place..
115-autoconf_ftbfs.patch
Hell no. You're breaking the configure again with this crap. I already reverted
the idiocy once, don't
Johannes,
Johannes Schlüter wrote:
> Raphael,
>
> I went over your patches from
> http://patch-tracker.debian.org/package/php5/5.3.1-2 and did quick
> reviews (didn't apply / test them or anything ...)
Although I would have preferred you wait for me to submit each patch
individually with enoug
Raphael,
I went over your patches from
http://patch-tracker.debian.org/package/php5/5.3.1-2 and did quick
reviews (didn't apply / test them or anything ...)
Here some comments:
004-ldap_fix.patch:
Do you have a test for this? when does it happen that ldap_value is
NULL happen? - If that's an
19 matches
Mail list logo
