Re: Question regarding include() and symlinks to directories

Vincent DUPONT wrote: > hello, > if I can still contribute to this topic, I suggest you never use simlinks. > We experienced very bad maintenance problems at a customer : when copying new files through > FTP, the simlinks were often erased or overwriten. > And this occured on every upgrade of the scripts. > > This would not occur with a simple and stable include_path setting. Moreover, one can set the > include_path dircetly from PHP, allowing for example 2 applications to define their own > include_path. > > Finaly, simlinks are not available on win32 platforms. not completely true - windows does have something they like to call hardlinks - which pretty much do the same thing: http://www.microsoft.com/resources/documentation/windows/xp/all/proddocs/en-us/fsutil_hardlink.mspx?mfr=true that said I also would recommend using a well thought out include_path strategy over a solution that uses symlinks, given the choice. of course Karl is living a deployed, production system and he probably does not have the luxury of *just* switching over. > > So, the include_path should be more stable (considering FTP) and more flexible than simlinks. > > > > Vincent Dupont > Ausy Belgium > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Richard Lynch [mailto:ceo@l-i-e.com] > Sent: Sat 1/6/2007 0:17 > To: Karl Pflästerer > Cc: php-general@lists.php.net > Subject: Re: [PHP] Question regarding include() and symlinks to directories > > On Thu, January 4, 2007 2:47 pm, Karl Pflästerer wrote: >> In my opinion include() should respect symlinks to directories and not >> dereference them before finding the file to include. Or am I wrong >> here? >> The PHP version is 5.1.6 (will soon be updated). > > WHOOPS! > > My fingers slipped and I keyboarded to "Send" button. > > SORRY! > > ... and use full pathname when you go to read a file. > > Anything else is more like playing an Adventure Game than Programming. > > I can see arguments both ways for when to work out the symlink, so > you'd have to take this up with Internals to get a change made... >