There's also "pear bundle" now:
[EMAIL PROTECTED](~/cvs/php/php5)$ pear bundle -d ext apd
downloading apd-0.4p2.tar ...
Starting to download apd-0.4p2.tar (-1 bytes)
.done: 189,440 bytes
Package ready at '/home/ssb/cvs/php/php5/ext/apd'
You can do this with
Hello Marcus,
Sunday, November 30, 2003, 1:35:23 PM, you wrote:
> Hello Wez,
> Sunday, November 30, 2003, 11:01:51 AM, you wrote:
>> There is no point moving unmaintained code from ext to pecl;
>> its just a waste of time until we can solve the problem at
>> packaging time, which is why I'm sug
On November 30, 2003 12:35 pm, Sara Golemon wrote:
> Perhaps I'm confused.
>
> I had the impression that the point of moving obsolesced extensions to PECL
> was so that they WOULDN'T be included in the main source tarball. Then,
> should user X out there need ext/foo they can do a: pear insta
On Sun, 30 Nov 2003, Jani Taskinen wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Nov 2003, Derick Rethans wrote:
>
> >SQlite is already in the normal tree, and pear install worked for PECL
> >extensions, but recently somebody broke that.
>
> I meant that it has worked fine for sqlite for long time.
> If someone bro
On Sun, 30 Nov 2003, Derick Rethans wrote:
>On Sun, 30 Nov 2003, Jani Taskinen wrote:
>
>>
>> I kinda have thought all the time that those extensions
>> that will be in a release stay in the php-src CVS module.
>> And the rest is put into PECL, where people can find them
>> and use
On Sun, 30 Nov 2003, Jani Taskinen wrote:
>
> I kinda have thought all the time that those extensions
> that will be in a release stay in the php-src CVS module.
> And the rest is put into PECL, where people can find them
> and use phpize or whatever to build them.
>
> Doesn't
I kinda have thought all the time that those extensions
that will be in a release stay in the php-src CVS module.
And the rest is put into PECL, where people can find them
and use phpize or whatever to build them.
Doesn't that 'pear install' thing work already? (sqlite, an
long" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: php.internals
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, November 30, 2003 4:52 AM
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Move old (or non-mainstream) extensions to PECL
before beta 3
> Hey, all I'm talking about is a script to put the golden extensions
> i
Hey, all I'm talking about is a script to put the golden extensions
into ext (and exclude the cruft) when we build our tarball distro.
--Wez.
> >> Why not go with RPM's then? The eays way is to split up the RPM's so
that we
> >> can have RPMs for the basic stuff like INI, Docs and all, then for t
Hello Derick,
Sunday, November 30, 2003, 1:39:36 PM, you wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Nov 2003, Marcus Boerger wrote:
>> Hello Wez,
>>
>> Sunday, November 30, 2003, 11:01:51 AM, you wrote:
>>
>> > There is no point moving unmaintained code from ext to pecl;
>> > its just a waste of time until we can solv
On Sun, 30 Nov 2003, Marcus Boerger wrote:
> Hello Wez,
>
> Sunday, November 30, 2003, 11:01:51 AM, you wrote:
>
> > There is no point moving unmaintained code from ext to pecl;
> > its just a waste of time until we can solve the problem at
> > packaging time, which is why I'm suggesting that one
Hello Wez,
Sunday, November 30, 2003, 11:01:51 AM, you wrote:
> There is no point moving unmaintained code from ext to pecl;
> its just a waste of time until we can solve the problem at
> packaging time, which is why I'm suggesting that one of the build
> guru's that hates these unmaintained exte
There is no point moving unmaintained code from ext to pecl;
its just a waste of time until we can solve the problem at
packaging time, which is why I'm suggesting that one of the build
guru's that hates these unmaintained extensions *cough* Jani
*cough* should work on the distro building tool whic
I didn't mean they would be totally unaccesible.
Just not supported in the main distribution..
--Jani
On Sun, 30 Nov 2003, Wez Furlong wrote:
>Then why not make a new module called "unsupported" and put them
>in there? PECL is not siberia.
>
>--Wez.
>
>> I think th
Then why not make a new module called "unsupported" and put them
in there? PECL is not siberia.
--Wez.
> I think the point in moving them to PECL is to make
> people realize that they are not supported. :)
>
> --Jani
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To u
I think the point in moving them to PECL is to make
people realize that they are not supported. :)
--Jani
p.s. Can someone PLEASE nuke ext/db finally?!
On Sun, 30 Nov 2003, Wez Furlong wrote:
>The point is that there is no need to waste time moving
>things around if there i
The point is that there is no need to waste time moving
things around if there is no build infrastructure in place.
Having these extensions in php-src/ext is no different to
having them in pecl/ except that they currently build under
ext, but would require work to make them build under pecl.
They
Hello!
Maybe we should move extensions like dbase, ovrimos, ingress_ii, qtdom &
pfpro to PECL before releasing beta 3 ?
Wez said, on IRC, that we need a script to pick out the "golden" extensions
for bundling, but Ilia pointed out that there's nothing golden about a few of
these.
/Magnus
-
18 matches
Mail list logo
