Hi,
Please top to make easy problems an endless pain please. And stop to
mix every topics you can think about in every single discussions.
Also it would be nice if you get cooler and stop to harass me on every
single reply or commit, get a life, do something, whatever helps but
stop to harass me.
Pierre,
I must be going crazy. Is there an actual problem that needs solving?
You're saying that a user who improperly installs php_openssl.dll (i.e.
does not follow instructions and set up ssleay.dll and libeay.dll) should
magically be able to use phar with openssl? Why?
You are not going
On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 2:46 AM, Greg Beaver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I must be going crazy. Is there an actual problem that needs solving?
> You're saying that a user who improperly installs php_openssl.dll (i.e.
> does not follow instructions and set up ssleay.dll and libeay.dll) should
>
Hi Greg,
I must be going crazy. Is there an actual problem that needs solving?
Yep, solved yesterday.
You're saying that a user who improperly installs php_openssl.dll (i.e.
does not follow instructions and set up ssleay.dll and libeay.dll) should
magically be able to use phar with openss
Pierre Joye wrote:
As testing has_xxx at runtime looks shiny and powerful, I don't think
it is worth the pain.
What pain?
Greg
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Steph Fox wrote:
Hi Pierre,
OK, I got back to the rest of your email now (caffeine always helps, eh).
I'm not sure it makes sense to have the ssl optional features enabled
but not ext/openssl. Or to say it better, I don't see the gain. What
is the gain besides being able to say: "heh you can
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 7:21 PM, Steph Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> if (!PHAR_G(has_zlib)) ...
>
> Pierre, you'd still need to test for them at runtime whether they were
> listed as a soft dependency or not!
No, not if they are not soft dependencies, this is what is done in 99%
of the php e
if (!PHAR_G(has_zlib)) ...
Pierre, you'd still need to test for them at runtime whether they were
listed as a soft dependency or not!
- Steph
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 5:44 PM, Steph Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> My main question now is why don't you actually reflect the (optional)
>> dependencies? bz2 and zlib compression available will not be available
>> if bz2 or zlib is not present, same for openssl.
>
> What do you mean? In conf
Pierre,
I finally took a look at why phar is not built shared as all other
extension. It seems to force it only to be able to be run with no dep
but still uses them if they are lately added (given that phar is now
built statically, that makes little sense). But in fact, it does have
deps agains
Hi,
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 4:38 PM, Steph Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We can sign and verify OpenSSL signatures without ext/openssl if we have the
> library dependency. In other words, this (with the module checks in util.c
> commented out) works fine:
I finally took a look at why phar is
Hey Pierre,
--enable-phar-ssl and do (not tested but it gives the idea):
if (PHP_PHAR_SSL == "yes") {
ADD_EXTENSION_DEP("phar", "openssl", true);
} else {
Erm... no, you've definitely missed the point. ADD_EXTENSION_DEP() only
works in one of the four possible scenarios, and that one
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 1:28 PM, Steph Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You're missing that Windows users don't tend to roll their own PHP. They
> tend to pick and choose their extensions.
I still miss your point here, I was only talking about bins releases
for windows.
> At present, if someone
Hi Pierre,
OK, I got back to the rest of your email now (caffeine always helps, eh).
I'm not sure it makes sense to have the ssl optional features enabled
but not ext/openssl. Or to say it better, I don't see the gain. What
is the gain besides being able to say: "heh you can use the ssl
featur
Hi Martin,
Would --with-openssl imply --enable-phar-ssl then? Sounds like a good
idea to me.
It certainly could... but what about distro builds?
- Steph
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Hi Pierre,
--with-openssl is used by ext/openssl and will continue to be used
like it is now (I'm thinking of adding --with-openssl-dir for
consistency but that's all).
This has absolutely no bearing on my question. Perhaps I expressed myself
badly.
- Steph
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runti
On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 10:32 PM, Steph Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It seems we don't use the openssl extension API at all in ext/phar, just the
> actual OpenSSL headers and libs. That means Phar with OpenSSL support can be
> both built and run without ext/openssl being built at all, but requ
On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 10:32 PM, Steph Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It seems we don't use the openssl extension API at all in ext/phar, just the
> actual OpenSSL headers and libs. That means Phar with OpenSSL support can be
> both built and run without ext/openssl being built at all, but requi
18 matches
Mail list logo
