Re: Troubles in http://pecl.php.net/account-request.php ?

Hi 2009/2/27 KaiGai Kohei <kaigai@ak.jp.nec.com>: > Johannes Schlüter wrote: >> >> On Thu, 2009-02-26 at 14:31 +0900, KaiGai Kohei wrote: >>> >>>  From the pecl-dev list archives, I seems to me an initial implementation >>> can be required, as I currently put it on the google code repository. >> >> We don'T actually have a strong process here. It's more a "yes, seems >> valid and the request is serious. > > Yes, this request is serious. > We currently have no interface to communicate with SELinux from PHP script. > > So, I would like to get an account to develop a module named as "selinux", > and documentation tree in same name. > >>> Please tell me, if something incorrect. >> >> I think the addition is fine. I had a short look at the code and some >> minor comments there: >> >> - Why do you need the #if HAVE_SELINUX in selinux.c? Whether the file is >>  being compiled should be controlled by the config.m4 so there should >>  be no need for that check > > Maybe, it came from a mimicry of other extension. > But it indeed unnecessary now. > >> - You do a RETURN_FALSE when zend_parse_parameters fails usually >>  we return NULL while there are some exceptions (like null having a >>  special meaning in that case or historic reasons ...) > > Does it means simple "return;" like: > >  http://cvs.php.net/viewvc.cgi/pecl/xattr/xattr.c?revision=1.12&view=markup > > or, using "RETURN_NULL();" ? > I'll follow the preferable mannar for PECL packages. > A simple "return;" is the same as saying "RETURN_NULL();" > -- > PECL development discussion Mailing List (http://pecl.php.net/) > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > > -- Kalle Sommer Nielsen kalle@php.net