# Module API Changes - Thread: https://externals.io/message/25684 - Original archive: https://news-web.php.net/php.internals/25684 - Started by Michael B Allen on 2006-09-14T14:44:10+00:00 - Messages: 15 - Reply by email to internals@lists.php.net - More for agents: search with https://externals.io/search.md?q={query} · JSON API at https://externals.io/api · documentation at https://externals.io/llms.txt --- ## #25684 — Michael B Allen — 2006-09-14T14:44:10+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/25684#25684 I see the module API has changed between 5.0 and 5.1. This caused my module to fail to load with: PHP Warning: PHP Startup: z\x17\xfc\xb6d\x12\xfc\xb6: Unable to initialize module Module compiled with module API=20041030, debug=0, thread-safety=0 PHP compiled with module API=20050922, debug=0, thread-safety=0 These options need to match in Unknown on line 0 Obviously this is problematic when shipping binaries. Basically I now have modules for 4, 5.0, and 5.1 in my installation package and look at `phpversion()` to determine which one to install. Are these module changes very common? Is there an easier way to ship module binaries? Is the major verion number guaranteed to change when the module API changes? Are there any other module API changes between 4 and the current version of PHP that would cause my module to fail to load? Thanks, Mike -- Michael B Allen PHP Active Directory SSO http://www.ioplex.com/ --- ## #25685 — Pierre — 2006-09-14T14:49:16+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/25684#25685 · In reply to: #25684 Hello, > Are there any other module API changes between 4 and the current version > of PHP that would cause my module to fail to load? PHP internals API has many changes between two major versions. Don't expect a module compiled for php4 to be loaded smoothly in php5, the same applies from one minor version to another. You have to provide a binary per minor version, and for debug or non debug builds, like any other DLL/so. (5.0 and 5.1 are php5 minor versions, for example) --Pierre --- ## #25688 — Michael B Allen — 2006-09-14T17:14:14+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/25684#25688 · In reply to: #25685 On Thu, 14 Sep 2006 16:49:16 +0200 Pierre wrote: > Hello, > > > > > […] > > PHP internals API has many changes between two major versions. Don't > expect a module compiled for php4 to be loaded smoothly in php5, the > same applies from one minor version to another. You have to provide a > binary per minor version, and for debug or non debug builds, like any > other DLL/so. > > (5.0 and 5.1 are php5 minor versions, for example) Sorry, I meant to say minor version. So the minor version will change if the module API changes? Our module compiles without modifcation with 4, 5.0, and 5.1. Is it possible to load a module compiled with a ZEND_MODULE_API_NO that differs from the one PHP was compiled with? Is it possible for a module compiled with debugging to be loaded in a debug build of PHP? It's not a horribly big deal to ship 3 modules but it would be nice if our package had a level of forward compatibility (e.g. worked with a new snapshot that introduced a moduel API change). Has the module API changed in 5.2? Thanks, Mike -- Michael B Allen PHP Active Directory SSO http://www.ioplex.com/ --- ## #25689 — Pierre — 2006-09-14T17:18:22+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/25684#25689 · In reply to: #25688 Hello, > On Thu, 14 Sep 2006 16:49:16 +0200 > Pierre wrote: > > > […] > > Sorry, I meant to say minor version. So the minor version will change > if the module API changes? > > Our module compiles without modifcation with 4, 5.0, and 5.1. Some of mines too. The problem is not to compile but to load it. > Is it possible to load a module compiled with a ZEND_MODULE_API_NO that > differs from the one PHP was compiled with? No > Is it possible for a module compiled with debugging to be loaded in a > debug build of PHP? Neither > It's not a horribly big deal to ship 3 modules but it would be nice if > our package had a level of forward compatibility (e.g. worked with a > new snapshot that introduced a moduel API change). If it a snapshot have a new API, it will also have a new API version and will be available in a new minor/major PHP version. > Has the module API changed in 5.2? Yes, if not it will still be 5.1.x. I think the changes will be explained in the README.UPDATE_5_2 file in CVS, or they are already in. --Pierre --- ## #25690 — Steph Fox — 2006-09-14T17:25:49+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/25684#25690 · In reply to: #25689 Hi Michael, Pierre - Erm, no they aren't in the upgrade guide, because the upgrade guide is aimed at user issues and this was seen primarily as an extension author issue. Do people generally think the module and extension API bumps should be in there? - Steph > Hello, > > > > […] > > Some of mines too. The problem is not to compile but to load it. > > > […] > > No > > > […] > > Neither > > > […] > > If it a snapshot have a new API, it will also have a new API version > and will be available in a new minor/major PHP version. > > > […] > > Yes, if not it will still be 5.1.x. I think the changes will be > explained in the README.UPDATE_5_2 file in CVS, or they are already > in. > > --Pierre --- ## #25691 — Pierre — 2006-09-14T17:39:07+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/25684#25691 · In reply to: #25690 Hello, > Hi Michael, Pierre - > > Erm, no they aren't in the upgrade guide, because the upgrade guide is aimed > at user issues and this was seen primarily as an extension author issue. Do > people generally think the module and extension API bumps should be in > there? Rasmus was talking about the internals change and ask if they can be put in this file. I think it is a very good suggestion and no, I did not have the time (and will not in the next 10 days) to do it :) --Pierre --- ## #25694 — Steph Fox — 2006-09-14T18:01:17+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/25684#25694 · In reply to: #25691 OK, has anyone enough time to commit this please? I left the extension API change out of it though (the ME_* support) - does that really need to go in there too? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Pierre" To: "Steph Fox" Cc: "Michael B Allen" ; Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 7:39 PM Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Module API Changes > Hello, > > > > […] > > Rasmus was talking about the internals change and ask if they can be > put in this file. I think it is a very good suggestion and no, I did > not have the time (and will not in the next 10 days) to do it :) > > --Pierre --- ## #25695 — Pierre — 2006-09-14T18:14:18+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/25684#25695 · In reply to: #25694 Hello, > OK, has anyone enough time to commit this please? > > I left the extension API change out of it though (the ME_* support) - does > that really need to go in there too? This thread justifies the addition (and all other about the same topic :). --- ## #25697 — Steph Fox — 2006-09-14T18:21:11+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/25684#25697 · In reply to: #25695 Huh? The question was about module API change, which is transparent to anyone mixing and matching PHP and module versions (which incidentally they shouldn't be doing in the first place). The extension API doesn't matter to anyone but extension authors... and actually I can't remember if the code for that retained BC off-hand too... need to check... There were a handful of minor API breakages that I vaguely remember fixing for PHP-GTK back then, but they came under the 'extension API bump' mbrella - in other words, they were ignored in their own right. Again, these were things that would be evident to an extension maintainer rather than an end user - and everything there would be better covered in README.EXTENSIONS than in an upgrade file aimed at end users, where it just looks scary and oblique. OK so I'll update that file tomorrow and reference it from the upgrade file. Any objections to that approach? - Steph ----- Original Message ----- From: "Pierre" To: "Steph Fox" Cc: "Michael B Allen" ; Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 8:14 PM Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Module API Changes > Hello, > > > > […] > > This thread justifies the addition (and all other about the same topic :). --- ## #25701 — Steph Fox — 2006-09-14T18:29:17+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/25684#25701 · In reply to: #25699 Hi Michael, > > Otherwise the only thing I really care about is that the minor number be > incremented whenever ZEND_MODULE_API_NO changes. Obviously the installer > needs that to pick the right module to install based on `phpversion()`. Bug it? :) (against the installer I mean) > > Mike > > -- > Michael B Allen > PHP Active Directory SSO > http://www.ioplex.com/ --- ## #25698 — Pierre — 2006-09-14T18:30:00+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/25684#25698 · In reply to: #25697 Hello, > Huh? > > The question was about module API change, which is transparent to anyone > mixing and matching PHP and module versions (which incidentally they > shouldn't be doing in the first place). The extension API doesn't matter to > anyone but extension authors... Which are the target audience for this text, maybe I was not clear :) > README.EXTENSIONS than in an upgrade file aimed at end users, where it just > looks scary and oblique. > > OK so I'll update that file tomorrow and reference it from the upgrade file. > Any objections to that approach? As long as there is a notice in the 5.2 ugprade me, I'm fine with that. Something like "internal API changed, see...". Thanks :) --Pierre --- ## #25699 — Michael B Allen — 2006-09-14T18:30:17+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/25684#25699 · In reply to: #25690 On Thu, 14 Sep 2006 19:25:49 +0200 "Steph Fox" wrote: > Hi Michael, Pierre - > > Erm, no they aren't in the upgrade guide, because the upgrade guide is aimed > at user issues and this was seen primarily as an extension author issue. Do > people generally think the module and extension API bumps should be in > there? I fine with looking at the source but it would be nice if there was a url WebCVS or somewhere to get a quick answer. Otherwise the only thing I really care about is that the minor number be incremented whenever ZEND_MODULE_API_NO changes. Obviously the installer needs that to pick the right module to install based on `phpversion()`. Mike -- Michael B Allen PHP Active Directory SSO http://www.ioplex.com/ --- ## #25702 — Steph Fox — 2006-09-14T18:31:59+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/25684#25702 · In reply to: #25698 Pierre, > > […] > > Which are the target audience for this text, maybe I was not clear :) Not at all. The upgrade guide explains the impact of the more important NEWS file changes at user level, and workarounds where necessary. > As long as there is a notice in the 5.2 ugprade me, I'm fine with > that. Something like "internal API changed, see...". Yep - cool. Hold off that commit then :) - Steph --- ## #25703 — Pierre — 2006-09-14T18:37:37+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/25684#25703 · In reply to: #25702 Hello, > Not at all. The upgrade guide explains the impact of the more important NEWS > file changes at user level, and workarounds where necessary. The target audience for *THIS* additon. > > […] > > Yep - cool. Hold off that commit then :) :) --- ## #25705 — Philip Olson — 2006-09-14T18:43:42+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/25684#25705 · In reply to: #25691 > > […] > > Rasmus was talking about the internals change and ask if they can be > put in this file. I think it is a very good suggestion and no, I did > not have the time (and will not in the next 10 days) to do it :) And a FYI, the documentation team has decided to create migration pages for minor releases of PHP and will use these README files as a base for this documentation. Before only major versions were documented this way. All should feel free to contribute to these docs :-) Regards, Philip