Re: Releasing win32service
| From: | Richard Quadling | Date: | Tue, 15 Mar 2011 17:41:42 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Releasing win32service | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 | Groups: | php.pecl.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to pecl-dev+get-8062@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On 15 March 2011 16:57, Christopher Jones <christopher.jones@oracle.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 03/15/2011 09:43 AM, Richard Quadling wrote:
>>
>> With regard to the package.xml file, what value should I put in for
>> <pearinstaller><min>
>>
>> What impact does the value have for a pecl extension?
>
> If you're using the package.xml 2.0 format (recommended), then you
> need PEAR 1.4 onwards. OCI8's package.xml has:
>
> <pearinstaller>
> <min>1.4.0b1</min>
> </pearinstaller>
>
> and I've seen no reason to fiddle with it. I see other package.xml
> files use plain 1.4.0. I have a note that early? PHP 5.2 used PEAR
> 1.7.2.
>
> Some references on the package.xml format are
>
> -
> http://devzone.zend.com/article/1051-PEAR-and-PECL-Packaging
> - http://pear.php.net/manual/en/guide-developers.php
>
> http://pear.php.net/manual/en/guide.developers.package2.php
>
> Chris
>
> --
> Email: christopher.jones@oracle.com
> Tel: +1 650 506 8630
> Blog: http://blogs.oracle.com/opal/
>
And I fell foul of http://pear.php.net/bugs/bug.php?id=17463&edit=3
--
Richard Quadling
Twitter : EE : Zend
@RQuadling : e-e.com/M_248814.html : bit.ly/9O8vFY