Re: pear(1): Could not open input file.

> From: "Tomas V.V.Cox" <cox@idecnet.com> > To: Roman Neuhauser <neuhauser@bellavista.cz> > Cc: PEAR DEV <pear-dev@lists.php.net> > Date: 25 Jun 2002 18:53:09 +0200 > Subject: Re: [PEAR-DEV] pear(1): Could not open input file. > > El mar, 25-06-2002 a las 17:06, Roman Neuhauser escribió: > > > Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 16:47:49 +0200 > > > From: "Tomas V.V.Cox" <cox@idecnet.com> > > > To: Roman Neuhauser <neuhauser@bellavista.cz> > > > CC: pear-dev <pear-dev@lists.php.net> > > > Subject: Re: [PEAR-DEV] pear(1): Could not open input file. > > > > > > > revert your commit, it doesn't help anything. > > > > > > Your patch is wrong, removing the -Cq will break compat with php-cgi. > > > Why it doesn't help? > > > > regardless of whether my patch is right or wrong, please do revert > > the change you made. it doesn't help anything, makes the script > > different from other pear scripts which use -d to set include_path, > > and thus increases the WTF factor. > > > > Please explain me the functional difference between (apart from the "WTF > factor" that you don't need to care): > > #!/usr/bin/php -Cqd include_path=foo > <?php > > ?> > > and > > #!/usr/bin/php -Cq > <?php > ini_set('include_path', 'foo'); > ?> please explain to me where I said that there was any functional difference. -- FreeBSD 4.6-STABLE 8:34PM up 1 day, 17:34, 7 users, load averages: 0.08, 0.04, 0.01