Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:13542 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 2073 invoked by uid 1010); 26 Oct 2004 22:31:37 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 1420 invoked from network); 26 Oct 2004 22:31:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mproxy.gmail.com) (216.239.56.249) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 26 Oct 2004 22:31:30 -0000 Received: by mproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id w67so109983cwb for ; Tue, 26 Oct 2004 15:31:30 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references; b=ZsZe5S0ng6UFKMEGAQwh4gMQsOEOwdDmIJ8T9qRKqNUWxdmkUCqKHV+z1ErHc9uMpbTnzryyWqBLor3g6r+73punOP0EfYeRhMMssqrnJS0x2AS2xdT8f1uL5IFKWyvJVtkBmjzX2mbgr8YcvFqfqhX0hFhEGpTXDZRE+1n5xjI= Received: by 10.11.117.20 with SMTP id p20mr811391cwc; Tue, 26 Oct 2004 15:31:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.11.117.13 with HTTP; Tue, 26 Oct 2004 15:31:29 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4e89b426041026153151d211ae@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 23:31:29 +0100 Reply-To: Wez Furlong To: Rasmus Lerdorf Cc: internals , Andi Gutmans , Marcus Boerger In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <4e89b4260410261513911b5ae@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] dl() unload / module shutdown issue still unresolved From: kingwez@gmail.com (Wez Furlong) On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 15:23:45 -0700 (PDT), Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: > On Tue, 26 Oct 2004, Wez Furlong wrote: > > It should be safe to never ever dlclose() a module. > > Do you mean never to dlclose() a module loaded via dl() at request time or > do you mean that in general it should be safe to never dlclose() a module > even if it came in via an extension line in the php.ini file? The former > is likely a true statement, but the latter is definitely not. I did mean the latter. What's the issue there? --Wez.