Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:56326 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 74361 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2011 19:59:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 14 Nov 2011 19:59:11 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=smalyshev@sugarcrm.com; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=smalyshev@sugarcrm.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain sugarcrm.com designates 207.97.245.163 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 207.97.245.163 smtp163.iad.emailsrvr.com Linux 2.6 Received: from [207.97.245.163] ([207.97.245.163:32818] helo=smtp163.iad.emailsrvr.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 11/A8-16941-A0371CE4 for ; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 14:59:10 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp26.relay.iad1a.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id A90E7A88A0; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 14:59:04 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: OK Received: by smtp26.relay.iad1a.emailsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: smalyshev-AT-sugarcrm.com) with ESMTPSA id 1F491A8944; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 14:59:03 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <4EC17308.6030406@sugarcrm.com> Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 11:59:04 -0800 Organization: SugarCRM User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20110929 Thunderbird/7.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Michael Wallner CC: "internals@lists.php.net" References: <4EC025B4.2070009@sugarcrm.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] function ob_gzhandler is missed in 5.4 From: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com (Stas Malyshev) Hi! > What did people use ob_gzhandler for directly? Well, apparently they did for some reason, doing custom output handlers based on it I guess. So the question is - is it possible to still have this function implemented? -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227