Re: Re: cvs: php-src(PHP_5_3) /win32/build DSP.README block.template.dsw buildconf.js config.w32 confutils.js projectgen.js template.dsp template.dsw

Moving this over to the windows list since no one else cares about this :) Steph Fox wrote:

Hi Rob,

So we have 60-odd broken files all over CVS to support that; and all I want to do is replace those 60-odd broken files with 4 working files in the win32 directory that will generate 60-odd broken files on request if you really really want them. My only question is, 'how much broken is OK?'

Personally the change you made would be fine with me as I don't make builds off of them and strictly use them for debugging/profiling. I did test it out and it did produce the project files. Stas had mentioned that he wanted to get them building (so in order to keep them around I would help with getting them up to speed). So the question does really come down to whether or not non-buildable dsp files are acceptable to everyone.

I think it would actually be counter-productive to have them buildable, to be honest, but I'm willing to spend another day on it if what's there isn't good enough for the uses those files are put to. I wasn't sure whether project dependencies and include paths would be important in this regard, for example. If they're not, we're good to go with last night's efforts :)

CC'ing him so he can chime in on this. Really though, with time getting short, we should be spending more time on the testing/fixing up of the 5.3 build and new libs than cosmetics.

There wasn't a lot wrong with the 5.3 build until very recently. I'm getting all sorts of peculiar things now (GD failing to find libiconv, SimpleXML failing to find SPL, etc etc). But you've seen the response if I touch anything in that department. These are things that are more important imo. On to the other stuff though.

First are you using all the new libs that will be used for the 5.3 build? What error are you seeing with GD? I am no longer getting any build issues with GD since my zlib changes. failure to find SPL is not specific to either of those as it happens to all the extensions that recently are no longer optional to the build. The ADD_DEPENDS macro doesnt take this into account and because things are laid out alphabetically, SPL hasnt been defined yes when the SimpleXML checks are being done. Same thing happens with extensions like SDO (requiring SPL) and anything that requires reflection - and comes before reflection in the alphabet :) What else are you running into? I would be very interested to hear any problems so they can get resolved. As far as you not touching the stuff, I don't think that's the case. I agree that some changes or ideas should be passed by the people on the list in case there are differing ideas for some of the larger changes, but fixing something is not wrong - as long as its made to HEAD too :).

The next thing on my personal TODO, apart from Phar-porting, is cleaning up the compiler warnings across the core. Also we never came to a real conclusion about versioning in core modules, but I guess that goes as 'cosmetic'. Well I think versioning is more than cosmetic as its something a bit more useful (isn't it meant to be for all platforms as well - not just windows)? You should being this up again.

The biggest thing is trying to get everyone working on the win stuff on the same page. There's alot to do and test, the plan and timeline for 5.3 stuff will be determined within a few days once Johannes and Lukas go through the lists. The priority is getting everything that is expected to be ready by their deadline in working order. I am hoping that the squabbles between you and Pierre are just due to the fact that you two aren't communicating. In any case we all should layout what we are working on for the release, what we plan on working on and/or what needs to be working on so we don't have people working on the same things unknowingly and can put resources to best use. Can't we all just work together as we are all working towards the same goal. <off_soapbox /> Rob