Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:91009 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 3279 invoked from network); 29 Jan 2016 09:51:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 29 Jan 2016 09:51:10 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=lester@lsces.co.uk; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=lester@lsces.co.uk; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain lsces.co.uk from 217.147.176.204 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: lester@lsces.co.uk X-Host-Fingerprint: 217.147.176.204 mail4.serversure.net Linux 2.6 Received: from [217.147.176.204] ([217.147.176.204:46491] helo=mail4.serversure.net) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 9C/71-24533-D063BA65 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2016 04:51:09 -0500 Received: (qmail 16840 invoked by uid 89); 29 Jan 2016 09:51:06 -0000 Received: by simscan 1.3.1 ppid: 16834, pid: 16837, t: 0.0714s scanners: attach: 1.3.1 clamav: 0.96/m:52/d:10677 Received: from unknown (HELO ?10.0.0.7?) (lester@rainbowdigitalmedia.org.uk@81.138.11.136) by mail4.serversure.net with ESMTPA; 29 Jan 2016 09:51:06 -0000 To: internals@lists.php.net References: <56AA7824.1090909@php.net> <56AB23AA.10806@php.net> Message-ID: <56AB360A.6050103@lsces.co.uk> Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2016 09:51:06 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <56AB23AA.10806@php.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Allow loading extensions by name From: lester@lsces.co.uk (Lester Caine) On 29/01/16 08:32, François Laupretre wrote: >> I think 100% portability will not be achieved very soon > > You're right, incompatibilities will remain everywhere absolute paths > are provided but, in many cases, the only differences are the > 'extension=' lines. > > Anyway, the main objective of this RFC is to hide the platform-specific > details of extension file names, making life easier for beginners and > documentation/script maintainers. In addition, Linux distributions apply their own rules for adding extensions and even 'core' ones so that ini material for each is contained in it's own file. Windows is perhaps the only distribution that follows the convention of adding 'additional' extensions via the main .ini file, so it's only really beginners using windows that would be able to use these changes? Any Linux beginner is likely to be adding 'apache-phpx' and getting a working framework for that distribution? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk