It would be nice to get at least a little bit of the context before going in
any kind of arguing.
For one the failing test happening after my commit was my mistake. It has
nothing to do with the bison versions but me having committed a wrong
expectf expression. However, the 1.x support was the reason why I made this
change. Instead of making it right I've updated my boxes with bison 2.x.
Lazy and better.1
That being cleared, anyone using 1.x will have noticed that the tests did
not pass. Fact is that it looks like I am the only tester using 2.x. Do you
have any example of supported systems still having only bison 1.x support?
Also 1.x is 13 years old, I would very surprised to see anyone still using
such an old system with 5.3.
Now, as stated earlier, my testing hosts do not have 1.x anymore and I won't
care about it anymore either. So basically nobody here takes care if it
anymore but let claim we do :)
it seems fedora had never bison 1.x
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=1084
Am 02.09.2011 01:23, schrieb Pierre Joye:
It would be nice to get at least a little bit of the context before going in
any kind of arguing.For one the failing test happening after my commit was my mistake. It has
nothing to do with the bison versions but me having committed a wrong
expectf expression. However, the 1.x support was the reason why I made this
change. Instead of making it right I've updated my boxes with bison 2.x.
Lazy and better.1That being cleared, anyone using 1.x will have noticed that the tests did
not pass. Fact is that it looks like I am the only tester using 2.x. Do you
have any example of supported systems still having only bison 1.x support?Also 1.x is 13 years old, I would very surprised to see anyone still using
such an old system with 5.3.Now, as stated earlier, my testing hosts do not have 1.x anymore and I won't
care about it anymore either. So basically nobody here takes care if it
anymore but let claim we do :)
It would be nice to get at least a little bit of the context before going in
any kind of arguing.For one the failing test happening after my commit was my mistake. It has
nothing to do with the bison versions but me having committed a wrong
expectf expression. However, the 1.x support was the reason why I made this
change. Instead of making it right I've updated my boxes with bison 2.x.
Lazy and better.1That being cleared, anyone using 1.x will have noticed that the tests did
not pass. Fact is that it looks like I am the only tester using 2.x. Do you
have any example of supported systems still having only bison 1.x support?Also 1.x is 13 years old, I would very surprised to see anyone still using
such an old system with 5.3.Now, as stated earlier, my testing hosts do not have 1.x anymore and I won't
care about it anymore either. So basically nobody here takes care if it
anymore but let claim we do :)
The default build tools for building PHP on Windows uses Bison 1.27.
http://windows.php.net/downloads/php-sdk/php-sdk-binary-tools-20110512.zip
contains
[2011-09-02 11:36:29] [D:\php-sdk-binary-tools-20110512\bin] []
bison.exe --version
GNU Bison version 1.27
--
Richard Quadling
Twitter : EE : Zend : PHPDoc
@RQuadling : e-e.com/M_248814.html : bit.ly/9O8vFY : bit.ly/lFnVea
Pierre Joye wrote:
Also 1.x is 13 years old, I would very surprised to see anyone still using
such an old system with 5.3.
It's the version packaged with the current windows build kit ;)
--
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//
Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php
no, read the mails pls...
Pierre Joye wrote:
Also 1.x is 13 years old, I would very surprised to see anyone still using
such an old system with 5.3.It's the version packaged with the current windows build kit ;)
--
Lester Caine - G8HFLContact - 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//
Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php--
--
Pierre
@pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org
Pierre Joye wrote:
no, read the mails pls...
Also 1.x is 13 years old, I would very surprised to see anyone still using
such an old system with 5.3.It's the version packaged with the current windows build kit;)
?
http://windows.php.net/downloads/php-sdk/php-sdk-binary-tools-20110512.zip has
bison 1.23 in it ... 28 June 1999
That is the one I'm running all of the windows builds on
--
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//
Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php
It uses now bison 2.4, you can replace it with the gnu win32 version
by deleting the old one and put the bison zip archive in php-sdk
(share and bin). The SDKs file are updated on release only, that's why
it is still 1.x there.
Pierre Joye wrote:
no, read the mails pls...
Also 1.x is 13 years old, I would very surprised to see anyone still
using
such an old system with 5.3.It's the version packaged with the current windows build kit;)
?
http://windows.php.net/downloads/php-sdk/php-sdk-binary-tools-20110512.zip
has bison 1.23 in it ... 28 June 1999
That is the one I'm running all of the windows builds on--
Lester Caine - G8HFLContact - 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//
Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php
--
Pierre
@pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org
Then we need a sdk-dev so people doing their own windows builds can
work in a correct environment while they are testing.
Updating the sdk only on release makes it impossible for devs to test
on windows prior to releases.
-Hannes
It uses now bison 2.4, you can replace it with the gnu win32 version
by deleting the old one and put the bison zip archive in php-sdk
(share and bin). The SDKs file are updated on release only, that's why
it is still 1.x there.Pierre Joye wrote:
no, read the mails pls...
Also 1.x is 13 years old, I would very surprised to see anyone still
using
such an old system with 5.3.It's the version packaged with the current windows build kit;)
?
http://windows.php.net/downloads/php-sdk/php-sdk-binary-tools-20110512.zip
has bison 1.23 in it ... 28 June 1999
That is the one I'm running all of the windows builds on--
Lester Caine - G8HFLContact - 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//
Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php--
Pierre@pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org
as I said earlier, these files are updated on release. It will be done
for the next releases. I will see if I can provide "snapshots" SDK but
that's something I try to avoid as it bring its lot of issues with
unstable/untested libs.
In the meantime it is very easy to replace the existing bison with the
the one from gnu win32, as I described earlier in this thread.
On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 1:58 PM, Hannes Magnusson
hannes.magnusson@gmail.com wrote:
Then we need a sdk-dev so people doing their own windows builds can
work in a correct environment while they are testing.
Updating the sdk only on release makes it impossible for devs to test
on windows prior to releases.-Hannes
It uses now bison 2.4, you can replace it with the gnu win32 version
by deleting the old one and put the bison zip archive in php-sdk
(share and bin). The SDKs file are updated on release only, that's why
it is still 1.x there.Pierre Joye wrote:
no, read the mails pls...
Also 1.x is 13 years old, I would very surprised to see anyone still
using
such an old system with 5.3.It's the version packaged with the current windows build kit;)
?
http://windows.php.net/downloads/php-sdk/php-sdk-binary-tools-20110512.zip
has bison 1.23 in it ... 28 June 1999
That is the one I'm running all of the windows builds on--
Lester Caine - G8HFLContact - 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//
Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php--
Pierre@pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org
--
--
Pierre
@pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org
as I said earlier, these files are updated on release. It will be done
for the next releases. I will see if I can provide "snapshots" SDK but
that's something I try to avoid as it bring its lot of issues with
unstable/untested libs.
That sounds like a good idea to me.
It will give other people the chance to test the libs in a broader
environment then your testing facilities.
-Hannes
On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 2:06 PM, Hannes Magnusson
hannes.magnusson@gmail.com wrote:
as I said earlier, these files are updated on release. It will be done
for the next releases. I will see if I can provide "snapshots" SDK but
that's something I try to avoid as it bring its lot of issues with
unstable/untested libs.That sounds like a good idea to me.
It will give other people the chance to test the libs in a broader
environment then your testing facilities.
it is not about our testing facitilites but about people using
unstable, incompatible, unreliable binaries to build their 3rd party
extensions and then report crashes to us.
--
Pierre
@pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org