From sheltren at cs.ucsb.edu Wed Jun 6 13:43:58 2007 From: sheltren at cs.ucsb.edu (Jeff Sheltren) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2007 09:43:58 -0400 Subject: [Fedora-php-devel-list] Changes to 'make install' in PHP 5.2.3 Message-ID: <400DD765-921D-4FB6-AF3D-0F2ED2378517@cs.ucsb.edu> Hi, just thought I'd give a heads up to prevent people from dealing with the same problem I just went through... I built PHP 5.2.3 by re-using the spec from the PHP SRPM in devel and bumping the version. The problem is that as of 5.2.3, they've changed the way 'make install' installs the cgi and cli binaries. There is no longer a need to call 'make install-cli' separately as now if you've configured for cgi, then both the cgi and cli versions get installed with a 'make install'. Doing the install the old way (as in the 5.2.2 RPM) leaves you with /usr/bin/php and /usr/bin/php- cgi as the same binary which is the CLI and not the CGI. To fix this, I changed the spec slightly, from: # Install everything from the CGI SAPI build pushd build-cgi make install INSTALL_ROOT=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT mv $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_bindir}/php $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_bindir}/php-cgi # Install the CLI SAPI as /usr/bin/php make install-cli INSTALL_ROOT=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT popd to: # Install everything from the CGI SAPI build pushd build-cgi make install INSTALL_ROOT=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT popd That installs both /usr/bin/php (cli) and /usr/bin/php-cgi correctly. -Jeff From lists at timj.co.uk Fri Jun 8 12:49:56 2007 From: lists at timj.co.uk (Tim Jackson) Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2007 13:49:56 +0100 Subject: [Fedora-php-devel-list] Changes to 'make install' in PHP 5.2.3 In-Reply-To: <400DD765-921D-4FB6-AF3D-0F2ED2378517@cs.ucsb.edu> References: <400DD765-921D-4FB6-AF3D-0F2ED2378517@cs.ucsb.edu> Message-ID: <46695074.704@timj.co.uk> Jeff Sheltren wrote: > Hi, just thought I'd give a heads up to prevent people from dealing with > the same problem I just went through... Thanks a lot Jeff. Did you have to change/add/remove any of the patches from 5.2.2-4? Thanks, Tim From sheltren at cs.ucsb.edu Fri Jun 8 12:58:34 2007 From: sheltren at cs.ucsb.edu (Jeff Sheltren) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2007 08:58:34 -0400 Subject: [Fedora-php-devel-list] Changes to 'make install' in PHP 5.2.3 In-Reply-To: <46695074.704@timj.co.uk> References: <400DD765-921D-4FB6-AF3D-0F2ED2378517@cs.ucsb.edu> <46695074.704@timj.co.uk> Message-ID: <5CA2B966-D64A-46A4-A744-A6FDB4D14080@cs.ucsb.edu> On Jun 8, 2007, at 8:49 AM, Tim Jackson wrote: > Jeff Sheltren wrote: > >> Hi, just thought I'd give a heads up to prevent people from >> dealing with >> the same problem I just went through... > > Thanks a lot Jeff. Did you have to change/add/remove any of the > patches > from 5.2.2-4? Hi Tim, nope, I didn't touch any of the patches. All of the patches in the 5.2.2-4 RPM applied cleanly, and I'm not aware of any other patches being needed. -Jeff From jorton at redhat.com Fri Jun 8 17:47:54 2007 From: jorton at redhat.com (Joe Orton) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2007 18:47:54 +0100 Subject: [Fedora-php-devel-list] Changes to 'make install' in PHP 5.2.3 In-Reply-To: <400DD765-921D-4FB6-AF3D-0F2ED2378517@cs.ucsb.edu> References: <400DD765-921D-4FB6-AF3D-0F2ED2378517@cs.ucsb.edu> Message-ID: <20070608174754.GA9641@redhat.com> On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 09:43:58AM -0400, Jeff Sheltren wrote: > To fix this, I changed the spec slightly, from: Thanks for sending that in, Jeff! 5.2.3 is now built for Raw Hide: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=31097 joe From sheltren at cs.ucsb.edu Fri Jun 8 18:20:57 2007 From: sheltren at cs.ucsb.edu (Jeff Sheltren) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2007 14:20:57 -0400 Subject: [Fedora-php-devel-list] Changes to 'make install' in PHP 5.2.3 In-Reply-To: <20070608174754.GA9641@redhat.com> References: <400DD765-921D-4FB6-AF3D-0F2ED2378517@cs.ucsb.edu> <20070608174754.GA9641@redhat.com> Message-ID: On Jun 8, 2007, at 1:47 PM, Joe Orton wrote: > On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 09:43:58AM -0400, Jeff Sheltren wrote: >> To fix this, I changed the spec slightly, from: > > Thanks for sending that in, Jeff! 5.2.3 is now built for Raw Hide: > > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=31097 > > joe Cool, I like your updated spec better than what I suggested! :) 'make -C' seems much cleaner than doing the pushd/popd dance. -Jeff From fedora at theholbrooks.org Sat Jun 16 04:14:15 2007 From: fedora at theholbrooks.org (Brandon Holbrook) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 23:14:15 -0500 Subject: [Fedora-php-devel-list] pecl rebuilds Message-ID: <46736397.9050308@theholbrooks.org> All, After just upgrading one of my development boxes to f7, I started getting a lot of PHP warnings when the PHP engine starts similar to the following: PHP Warning: PHP Startup: apc: Unable to initialize module Module compiled with module API=20050922, debug=0, thread-safety=0 PHP compiled with module API=20060613, debug=0, thread-safety=0 and PHP Warning: PHP Startup: mailparse: Unable to initialize module Module compiled with module API=20050922, debug=0, thread-safety=0 PHP compiled with module API=20060613, debug=0, thread-safety=0 (apc has already been bugzilla'd at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244045) apc and mailparse are the only 2 complaining on my box, and a quick "yum list *pecl*" verifies both of these modules still bear a 'fc6' disttag. Needless to say, since pecl modules are compiled against a specific PHP version, this is unacceptable. In addition to rebuilding these packages for f7 asap, I'd like to come up with a good policy about making mandatory rebuilds of pecl packages whenever the PHP core ABI gets updated. Is it reasonable to assume ABI updates only happen between fedora releases, or do we need to also address planning simultaneous php and php-pecl-* updates mid-release? Other thoughts? -Brandon From Fedora at FamilleCollet.com Sat Jun 16 07:18:49 2007 From: Fedora at FamilleCollet.com (Remi Collet) Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2007 09:18:49 +0200 Subject: [Fedora-php-devel-list] pecl rebuilds In-Reply-To: <46736397.9050308@theholbrooks.org> References: <46736397.9050308@theholbrooks.org> Message-ID: <46738ED9.7000602@FamilleCollet.com> Brandon Holbrook a ?crit : > I'd like to come up with a good policy about making > mandatory rebuilds of pecl packages whenever the PHP core ABI gets > updated. Is it reasonable to assume ABI updates only happen between > fedora releases, or do we need to also address planning simultaneous php > and php-pecl-* updates mid-release? Other thoughts? The ABI compatibility MUST be assured by the virtual dependencies. See : http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/PHP#head-435fc0b2b6fa2e807e89b72025848db84fea9d1c I've posted a note on the bug and reassigned it to php-pecl-apc I've also open a bug for php-pecl-mailparse https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244500 Remi. From fedora at theholbrooks.org Thu Jun 21 21:51:41 2007 From: fedora at theholbrooks.org (Brandon Holbrook) Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 16:51:41 -0500 Subject: [Fedora-php-devel-list] PEAR 1.6 Message-ID: <467AF2ED.90106@theholbrooks.org> All, what is our plan wrt php-pear-1.6? Are we going to update f7 or just f8? Has that decision already been made or should that be an order of business for the PHP SIG to discuss and decide? Honestly, I'm not sure what the differences are between 1.5 and 1.6. Once we get a decision I'll update the wiki. Reason I'm asking: I was about to update Mail_Mime to the latest and greatest but found that it requires pear-1.6, so it'll have to wait :) -Brandon From Fedora at FamilleCollet.com Sun Jun 24 06:17:52 2007 From: Fedora at FamilleCollet.com (Remi Collet) Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2007 08:17:52 +0200 Subject: [Fedora-php-devel-list] Register PECl extensions ? Message-ID: <467E0C90.1060202@FamilleCollet.com> We are registering the PEAR extensions, so "pear list" give the install list. But we do nothing for PECL extensions. It seems that it is now possible (since pear 1.5.0 ?) using pecl install --nodeps --soft --force --register-only --nobuild /path/to/package.xml pecl uninstall --nodeps --ignore-errors --register-only package_name Read : https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244045 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221129 An example : http://remi.collet.free.fr/rpms/SPEC/php-pecl-apc.spec (i've don't use >/dev/null to see warning/notice i have to work on, to file an upstream bug) Please post feedback - should php-pecl-apc be renamed to php-pecl-APC ? - about using this feature - about updating Guidelines - about using this with pear < 1.5.0 (i don't have it available) We'll probaly have to think of using the same dir for %{pear_xmldir} and %{pecl_xmldir} Remi. From jorton at redhat.com Tue Jun 26 14:54:54 2007 From: jorton at redhat.com (Joe Orton) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 15:54:54 +0100 Subject: [Fedora-php-devel-list] PEAR 1.6 In-Reply-To: <467AF2ED.90106@theholbrooks.org> References: <467AF2ED.90106@theholbrooks.org> Message-ID: <20070626145454.GA4354@redhat.com> On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 04:51:41PM -0500, Brandon Holbrook wrote: > All, what is our plan wrt php-pear-1.6? Are we going to update f7 or > just f8? I'll do both when I get some spare round tuits unless there's any reasons not to.... Tim? Patches welcome in the mean-time! joe