Re: Re: 5.3.0 stable release
| From: | Christopher Jones | Date: | Mon, 22 Jun 2009 22:39:33 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Re: 5.3.0 stable release | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-44424@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Greg Beaver wrote:
jvlad wrote:Greg, Can the messages be enhanced e.g. explaining what will happen in these cases? For example "pear: not found. Using XXX instead" would help users for #1. Chris -- Email: christopher.jones@oracle.com Twitter: http://twitter.com/ghrd1. you're wrong, PHP does not depend on system-wide installed pear, it will simply use it if present 2. nothing is missing. see http://pear.php.net/PHP_Archive If installed, phar.phar will function (partially) without the phar extension being present. In other words, not a problem, not a bug.Greg, your answer is even more suspicious. If "Class file not found" is neither a problem, nor a bug, what is it? Why does it appear in the output? Doesn't "pear: not found" mean that make tried to run pear in the $PATH and shell produced this error in the stderr? Shouldn't it run $prefix/bin/pear only? What's about PHP_Archive? Shouldn't it be there in the sources? In other words, I see two bugs there: 1. PHP depends on the system-wide installed pear and tries to run it. 2. One or many files are missed in the package producing the "Archive.php class file not found" error.php5.3-200906221030 make produces suspecious output under FreeBSD 6/amd64: Generating phar.php Generating phar.phar pear: not found ^^^^^^^^^^^^ Pear package PHP_Archive or Archive.php class file not found. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^This is not suspicious. It is self-explanatory, not a problem, not a bug. Do not pass Go. Do not collect $200.