httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Pierre Joye <pierre....@gmail.com>
Subject re: 5.3.6
Date Mon, 04 Apr 2011 22:53:51 GMT
hi,

Sorry for creating a new thread, I tried to get the thread in separate
mails but failed, and for the late reply.

> dev Digest of: get.71102_71118
>
> Topics (messages 71102 through 71118):
>
> PHP5.3.6

> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Rich Bowen <rbowen@rcbowen.com>
> To: dev@httpd.apache.org
> Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 10:24:48 -0400
> Subject: PHP5.3.6
> I wanted to be sure that folks are aware of what's going on in the Windows/PHP world.
I know that, in one sense, it's not our problem, but it *feels* like our problem to me, and
to many of our users.
>
> PHP5.3.6 was just released, and the Windows binaries are built with VC9, meaning that
it won't work with our Windows binaries. I know that it's been discussed before, and there's
a plan to move to VC9, but as of last week, the official PHP build doesn't run with the official
Apache httpd build. The PHP website recommends that folks use the Apache Lounge build.
>
> This sucks.

It is nothing new, we have been provided VC9 builds since 5.3.0. As we
did not initially plan to drop VC6 support in 5.3.x, we did not have
any other choice at this point.

> It sucks that our users have to jump through additional hoops. It sucks even more that
there wasn't (or at least, it appears to me that there wasn't) conversation between the two
communities prior to this happening. The folks in php-land are aware that it's a problem,
but don't see to really think that it's *their* problem. For our part, we seem to be unaware
that anything happened.

We had contacts and discussions with Bill before (his post later in
this thread was by the way a surprise to me, like it was a totally new
thing that php has VC9 builds for 5.3 and that we never ever discussed
it and what should be done, I will reply to his reply in details and
later).

> I'm not sure exactly what I'm suggesting we do about this. It would be nice if we could
provide binaries built with VC9, or if we could recommend on the download site that people
get binaries from ApacheLounge. I don't know if either of these is really an option. How would
folks feel about our download site encouraging folks to use ApacheLounge's version of 2.2?
I suspect that there'd be some resistance to this, based on our previous interactions with
them.

It is a recommendation and apachelounge can be trusted just as good as
apache.org's builds. Which are, according to Bill, convenience builds
not official builds.

On the other hand, I'm working with the leading packager (xamp, wamp
or easyphp) to get them migrate to VC9 for their 5.3 packages. Easyphp
did it already, xamp will follow shortly. Like it or not, this
undesired step moves the ball forward.

> I have a foot in the documentation team of both projects,

I wonder how you did not hear about this issue in our php internals
list, our RC announcements, etc. then.

> so I tend to hear both sides of the conversation at least from that perspective. I'd
like for us to be more proactive about strengthening the community bond between us and what
is probably the most important third-party Apache httpd module. There seems to be a pretty
strong "they don't ever listen to us" attitude on both sides, and I'm not sure that it's really
warranted.

That's not accurate. We have discussed together about what we should
do, together, sync'ed. Bill's replies so far was pretty much the same
as what he has written later here. Much theories and co but no
solution, alternative or even correct information or backlogs. It was
also told that "apache will use whatever is available at that time",
which is what we did as well by the time of the 5.3.0 release.

PHP next major version is another story and we are willing to be sure
that such problems won't ever happen again (see below).

To summarize:

We have been waiting for apache for years to move to something more
decent than the dead VC6. It took us a lot of resource to keep VC6
support (actually it costs me a lot of time). And that's something
we/I can't afford anymore, the recent floating point bug in 5.3.5
forces us to end the VC6 support.

The positive side of this move is that recent versions of VC9 gives us
tools to provide CRT agnostic binaries (SxS being one). It could a
very valid solution. It is also much easier to write clean enough code
with these versions than with the VC6 crt (mingw included), clean
enough to be loaded and used by an app compiled against a different
crt (I have some VC10 php working just fine with a VC9 apache). There
are a couple of things we have to take care about, but I'm confident
we can solve them as well.

Cheers,
- Hide quoted text -
--
Pierre

@pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net

Mime
View raw message