Re: new subcategory "Node" & something about processes

On Sun, 24 Nov 2002 13:30:56 -0000 richard@v-webmail.co.uk (Richard Heyes) wrote: > > Hm.. Yes.. But why don't leave Net_Socket how it is and create some new > category then. > > No problem with this at all, except that I still think all this stuff is > vaguely networking related, and so belongs under the Net/ namespace in PEAR, > and the Networking category on the pear website. What about FIFO named pipes and system v ipc operations ? They only work on one and the same host (if there is no nfs or whatever). > > Socket is much more than a tcp/udp network socket. And where to store fifo > or sysvmsg stuff then. > > As said in pear's documentation I know that something shouldn't be twice > available in pear. > > Well it shouldn't be available twice if the two are indifferent. If however > there is sufficient difference, then there's no problem having two > implementations. Okay, nice :) > > But in this case the second Socket solution would provide lots of nice > feautres. > > Because of portability, the socket extension also works for windows. > > But I think you're talking about "Should i install php with sockets now > because of that?" > > Well.. If someone hardly needs unix sockets in the script he must install > the extension. > > Why shouldn't Pear provide a nice interface to use them ? > > I never said it shouldn't. > > -- > Richard Heyes > V-webmail - http://www.v-webmail.co.uk > bye