Re: Interest in a "null" SAPI for embedding?

From: Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2013 03:59:14 +0000
Subject: Re: Interest in a "null" SAPI for embedding?
References: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  Groups: php.internals 
Request: Send a blank email to [email protected] to get a copy of this message
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 7:49 PM, Johannes Schlüter
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Ah, there's another thing to mind: Extensions can be marked as "cli
> extensions", if statically compiled they become only part of the CLI
> binary, not other SAPIs. Think readline & pcntl.

The logical expectation then would be not to include them in the shlib
build, as that is not the CLI binary.  Of course nothing would prevent
making them part of a CLI binary that links to the shlib.

But definitely, in any case where statically-linked anything is the
goal, using an option that builds almost all the code into a shared
library may cause an endless and entertaining variety of problems and
conflicts.  The solution for such cases would appear to be fairly
straightforward: do not use that option in those cases where it
produces a non-viable result.

Thanks!


Thread (15 messages)

« previous php.internals (#68577) next »