Re: RFC: phpdbg

From: Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2013 11:15:14 +0000
Subject: Re: RFC: phpdbg
References: 1 2 3 4  Groups: php.internals 
Request: Send a blank email to internals+get-70456@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message 
On 11/30/2013 10:41 AM, Nikita Popov wrote:

On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 3:38 PM, Joe Watkins <krakjoe@php.net> wrote:


Morning,


         This is not an extension, it is a SAPI module. The build system

does not support external SAPI modules, the implementation requires Zend
API which is not exported (or wasn't, has since been patched).



Independently from phpdbg, is there any particular (technical) reason that
prevents (zend?) extensions from registering SAPIs? Could we add something
for that to work?

Nikita

(Sorry niki, you will get this twice ...)


My head gets stuck in a loop when trying to think about it ... for a zend extension or, certainly, an extension, to be able to do anything at all, zend has to be initialized, it probably can work in some cases, but if the purpose of the sapi module is to direct how zend behaves then it won't work, I don't think ...

Building against 5.6+ is not a problem anyway, we could maybe even patch embed and build against that for phpdbg in particular, but the problem isn't so much how difficult it is to write a makefile but how difficult it is to deploy any SAPI module apart from the sources. Nobody using windows does their own builds, for a start, although you can distribute binaries if you are a master of VC, which I'm not. Even on unix nobody builds from source, nobody builds the embed library, it's not enough to have a working build process because that doesn't get you into the repositories for the major distributions.

I certainly would like to see improvements made such that in the future it is easier to deploy SAPI modules, it's not useful for phpdbg, but would be a very welcome change, for me ...

Cheers
Joe

Thread (21 messages)

« previous php.internals (#70456) next »