Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:48880 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 81289 invoked from network); 21 Jun 2010 03:19:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 21 Jun 2010 03:19:43 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=smalyshev@sugarcrm.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=smalyshev@sugarcrm.com; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain sugarcrm.com designates 67.192.241.203 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 67.192.241.203 smtp203.dfw.emailsrvr.com Linux 2.6 Received: from [67.192.241.203] ([67.192.241.203:48893] helo=smtp203.dfw.emailsrvr.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id AA/6B-15307-E4ADE1C4 for ; Sun, 20 Jun 2010 23:19:43 -0400 Received: from relay20.relay.dfw.mlsrvr.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by relay20.relay.dfw.mlsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 599A421280CE; Sun, 20 Jun 2010 23:19:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: by relay20.relay.dfw.mlsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: smalyshev-AT-sugarcrm.com) with ESMTPSA id 08DF321280B7; Sun, 20 Jun 2010 23:19:39 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4C1EDA4B.9070300@sugarcrm.com> Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 20:19:39 -0700 Organization: SugarCRM User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100317 Thunderbird/3.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ilia Alshanetsky , PHP Internals References: <4C1EA662.1010601@sugarcrm.com> <49B64FA1-1BAA-4C88-AC9D-09E75792F05C@seancoates.com> <4C1ED20E.8050805@sugarcrm.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] APC in trunk From: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com (Stas Malyshev) Hi! > Even if the extension is compiled by default, we can (and probably > should) leave apc.enabled at Off, recognizing some the things you are > mentioning. I'm not sure I see the point of compiling it if it's disabled. Anyway, most of the distributions probably would make it .so just as it happens now for tons of other modules and would enable it in .ini. And building it from source you almost never rely on defaults anyway if you know what you want (which is the reason why you didn't use the binary one, I guess). So, summarily, I don't think we should enable it by default, as for compiling it by default, I don't think it matters too much since I don't believe defaults matter too much there. -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227