Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:40158 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 69055 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2008 15:39:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 30 Aug 2008 15:39:40 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=pierre.php@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=pierre.php@gmail.com; sender-id=pass; domainkeys=bad Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.198.234 as permitted sender) DomainKey-Status: bad X-DomainKeys: Ecelerity dk_validate implementing draft-delany-domainkeys-base-01 X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: pierre.php@gmail.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.198.234 rv-out-0506.google.com Received: from [209.85.198.234] ([209.85.198.234:44410] helo=rv-out-0506.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 45/31-27196-9B969B84 for ; Sat, 30 Aug 2008 11:39:38 -0400 Received: by rv-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id g37so1214191rvb.23 for ; Sat, 30 Aug 2008 08:39:34 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=b55xBRztLpQ4UCIYgbKbacvEl2gPvx4HMXF2zuIIUuQ=; b=X/C5W2uh6VrUd7Vbfp30yQ+EWRLsj03kdxJe5E0xElm9ylz1JmfFVqXoqVFPb96qm0 5IakBF51onlHLBApnToE+J6Ed9Cx8VDXGONPqx7jZtOB8fw7yfJvbcD7bkVpIir/qV32 mV9M6IN79RSJR4s2HxmCVU4oOOnprULFEpEes= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=m5VwPrSqI16mhnzz4WknIdDGTACocNu/EhxgqgW/PV1hCpbHuh7wHhMRpcDIKFkEIv De8N5JRosLMVdShVmVcAJKflK4ZczFZYgxP4PcFQasJm5fKDsDPKn0LRxYEcl55isiVu lUMuXrK6Yrd2LcA1X3qh2TTg80P5voSZy4vIg= Received: by 10.141.128.19 with SMTP id f19mr2237016rvn.107.1220110774492; Sat, 30 Aug 2008 08:39:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.140.178.14 with HTTP; Sat, 30 Aug 2008 08:39:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2008 17:39:34 +0200 To: "Steph Fox" Cc: "Greg Beaver" , internals@lists.php.net In-Reply-To: <00b801c90ab3$61191fb0$84fc1f3e@foxbox> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <48B955FD.804@chiaraquartet.net> <00b801c90ab3$61191fb0$84fc1f3e@foxbox> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] phar in win32 snapshots From: pierre.php@gmail.com ("Pierre Joye") On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 5:16 PM, Steph Fox wrote: >>> Is there a reason phar is built shared in win32 snapshots even though >>> the default in config.w32 is to build it statically? >> >> The default config.w32 (besides being wrong) is shared. > > ARG_ENABLE("phar", "disable phar support", "yes"); > > I'm still not in a position to test > I do know, though, > that it all worked fine before the build system was 'upgraded' and several > of the other config.w32 files across the core were 'fixed' to accommodate > those changes. Let forget this attempt to yet again discredit the fantastic work being done by the windows team and let us try to figure out what's wrong. The behavior has changed after your dependency patch, the 3rd argument of EXTENSION has to be set to false if the extension has to be built statically. >> Why should it be built statically? > > Because that's what it says in the config file. What's the actual reason to build phar statically? -- Pierre http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org