hi,
It may be good to merge
http://svn.php.net/viewvc?view=revision&revision=311748 to 5.4 too.
This commit is about issues similar to the one describe in #54918.
Any reason not to do it before next beta/rc?
Cheers,
Pierre
@pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org
hi,
It may be good to merge
http://svn.php.net/viewvc?view=revision&revision=311748 to 5.4 too.
This commit is about issues similar to the one describe in #54918.
If it gets merged, don't forget
http://svn.php.net/viewvc?view=revision&revision=316134 and
http://svn.php.net/viewvc?view=revision&revision=316135
-Hannes
Hi!
It may be good to merge
http://svn.php.net/viewvc?view=revision&revision=311748 to 5.4 too.
This commit is about issues similar to the one describe in #54918.Any reason not to do it before next beta/rc?
I'm not sure I understand this patch completely. I understand that if
one of the MINITs fails, this patch just continues. But we have tons of
code that assumes all basic MINITs worked - we always use variables
initialized in these MINITs without checking, etc. So does it really
make sense to continue if one of basic MINITs fail? On regular module
loading, MINIT failure is E_CORE_ERROR, why not here?
Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect
SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/
(408)454-6900 ext. 227
Hi!
It may be good to merge
http://svn.php.net/viewvc?view=revision&revision=311748 to 5.4 too.
This commit is about issues similar to the one describe in #54918.Any reason not to do it before next beta/rc?
I'm not sure I understand this patch completely. I understand that if
one of the MINITs fails, this patch just continues. But we have tons of
code that assumes all basic MINITs worked - we always use variables
initialized in these MINITs without checking, etc. So does it really
make sense to continue if one of basic MINITs fail? On regular module
loading, MINIT failure is E_CORE_ERROR, why not here?
I'm not sure about this too. Is there a reason why we continue to MINIT
the other basic modules if one fails ?