FAQ
Hi,

So I figure I'll restart this discussion. There are a couple of reasons
I want to bundle libxml2:

1) XML support is crucial. You may not like XML, but its the standard
for data exchange these days, and is incredibly important when
interoperating with external services. A PHP installation should simply
not exist without XML support, if it does, then imho we've done
something wrong. Applications that are distributed need to rely on
certain features in PHP, XML is one such feature. I think this much has
already been agreed upon.

2) Libxml2 may be installed everywhere, but the version we rely upon
isn't available everywhere. As witnessed by a message to the list by
michael, and a problem that someone else had over IRC. Its fine to
allow people to use external versions of libxml2, however, we need a
recent version to operate. For example, schema support is pretty
essential, as its becoming the new DTD format for XML (and is required
for proper SOAP support).

Its further helpful that users can rely on a certain implementation of
libxml2 distributed with a certain version of PHP.

Anyhow, I thought I'd again bring this up before the beta. What do
people think?

-Sterling

--
Good judgement comes from experience, and experience comes from
bad judgement.
- Fred Brooks

Search Discussions

  • Jani Taskinen at Jun 27, 2003 at 4:46 pm

    On 27 Jun 2003, Sterling Hughes wrote:
    Hi,

    So I figure I'll restart this discussion. There are a couple of reasons
    I want to bundle libxml2:

    1) XML support is crucial. You may not like XML, but its the standard
    for data exchange these days, and is incredibly important when
    interoperating with external services. A PHP installation should simply
    not exist without XML support, if it does, then imho we've done
    something wrong. Applications that are distributed need to rely on
    certain features in PHP, XML is one such feature. I think this much has
    already been agreed upon.
    I'm against bundling it, there's absolutely no reason to.
    2) Libxml2 may be installed everywhere, but the version we rely upon
    isn't available everywhere. As witnessed by a message to the list by
    michael, and a problem that someone else had over IRC. Its fine to
    allow people to use external versions of libxml2, however, we need a
    recent version to operate. For example, schema support is pretty
    essential, as its becoming the new DTD format for XML (and is required
    for proper SOAP support).
    We can require certain version in configure.

    --Jani
  • Anil Madhavapeddy at Jun 27, 2003 at 5:04 pm

    On Fri, Jun 27, 2003 at 12:25:39PM -0400, Sterling Hughes wrote:

    2) Libxml2 may be installed everywhere, but the version we rely upon
    isn't available everywhere. As witnessed by a message to the list by
    michael, and a problem that someone else had over IRC. Its fine to
    allow people to use external versions of libxml2, however, we need a
    recent version to operate. For example, schema support is pretty
    essential, as its becoming the new DTD format for XML (and is required
    for proper SOAP support).
    If you need a recent version, why not just require it as part of
    the configure tests as usual?

    --
    Anil Madhavapeddy http://anil.recoil.org
    University of Cambridge http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk
  • Sterling Hughes at Jun 27, 2003 at 5:16 pm
    Because, this will encourage people to do :

    --without-xml

    Instead of upgrading the system libxml2.

    -Sterling
    On Fri, 2003-06-27 at 13:04, Anil Madhavapeddy wrote:
    On Fri, Jun 27, 2003 at 12:25:39PM -0400, Sterling Hughes wrote:

    2) Libxml2 may be installed everywhere, but the version we rely upon
    isn't available everywhere. As witnessed by a message to the list by
    michael, and a problem that someone else had over IRC. Its fine to
    allow people to use external versions of libxml2, however, we need a
    recent version to operate. For example, schema support is pretty
    essential, as its becoming the new DTD format for XML (and is required
    for proper SOAP support).
    If you need a recent version, why not just require it as part of
    the configure tests as usual?
    --
    "The three most dangerous things in the world are a programmer
    with a soldering iron, a hardware type with a program patch and
    a user with an idea."
    - Unknown
  • Dan Kalowsky at Jun 27, 2003 at 7:05 pm

    On Fri, 27 Jun 2003, Sterling Hughes wrote:

    Because, this will encourage people to do :

    --without-xml

    Instead of upgrading the system libxml2.
    So you are forcing users and installations to use xml when they might not
    want to upgrade their libxml? This seems like a rather wrong way to go
    about this.

    But more importantly why don't you fix --with-xml to respect the
    --disable-all flag in configure first :)

    BTW I'm still -1 on bundling this code.

    -Sterling
    On Fri, 2003-06-27 at 13:04, Anil Madhavapeddy wrote:
    On Fri, Jun 27, 2003 at 12:25:39PM -0400, Sterling Hughes wrote:

    2) Libxml2 may be installed everywhere, but the version we rely upon
    isn't available everywhere. As witnessed by a message to the list by
    michael, and a problem that someone else had over IRC. Its fine to
    allow people to use external versions of libxml2, however, we need a
    recent version to operate. For example, schema support is pretty
    essential, as its becoming the new DTD format for XML (and is required
    for proper SOAP support).
    If you need a recent version, why not just require it as part of
    the configure tests as usual?
    ---------------------------------------------------------------<
    Dan Kalowsky "I'll walk a thousand miles just
    http://www.deadmime.org/~dank to slip this skin."
    dank-nom@aps-deadmime.org - "Streets of Philadelphia",
    kalowsky@php.net Bruce Springsteen
  • Anil Madhavapeddy at Jun 27, 2003 at 8:15 pm

    On Fri, Jun 27, 2003 at 01:08:08PM -0400, Sterling Hughes wrote:
    Because, this will encourage people to do :

    --without-xml

    Instead of upgrading the system libxml2.
    If your first argument about the utter importance of XML/PHP is true, then
    I'm sure they won't mind updating their system libxml2.

    Otherwise, they can live without it (I certainly can) ...

    --
    Anil Madhavapeddy http://anil.recoil.org
    University of Cambridge http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk
  • Mike Robinson at Jun 27, 2003 at 8:52 pm

    Anil Madhavapeddy wrote:
    On Fri, Jun 27, 2003 at 01:08:08PM -0400, Sterling Hughes wrote:
    Because, this will encourage people to do :

    --without-xml

    Instead of upgrading the system libxml2.
    If your first argument about the utter importance of XML/PHP is true, then
    I'm sure they won't mind updating their system libxml2.
    Updating system libraries is a little more complex than compiling
    software against those libraries, or in this case simply enabling
    built-in libraries. The latter is far more likely to happen,
    particularly in hosting situations. The importance of PHP features
    lies with users, not system administrators.
    Otherwise, they can live without it (I certainly can) ...
    XML support has been there for ages. I think you'd be surprised
    how many people use it.

    IMHO, adding libxml2 is a bonus for users and good for PHP.
    Not as bonus as sqlite, but a good thing nonetheless. :)

    Best Regards
    Mike Robinson
  • Jani Taskinen at Jun 27, 2003 at 11:42 pm
    Remember the issues with --with-mysql and some third
    party library linking with external libs..?

    --Jani

    On 27 Jun 2003, Sterling Hughes wrote:

    Because, this will encourage people to do :

    --without-xml

    Instead of upgrading the system libxml2.

    -Sterling
    On Fri, 2003-06-27 at 13:04, Anil Madhavapeddy wrote:
    On Fri, Jun 27, 2003 at 12:25:39PM -0400, Sterling Hughes wrote:

    2) Libxml2 may be installed everywhere, but the version we rely upon
    isn't available everywhere. As witnessed by a message to the list by
    michael, and a problem that someone else had over IRC. Its fine to
    allow people to use external versions of libxml2, however, we need a
    recent version to operate. For example, schema support is pretty
    essential, as its becoming the new DTD format for XML (and is required
    for proper SOAP support).
    If you need a recent version, why not just require it as part of
    the configure tests as usual?
  • John Coggeshall at Jul 1, 2003 at 9:08 am

    On Fri, 2003-06-27 at 13:08, Sterling Hughes wrote:
    Because, this will encourage people to do :

    --without-xml

    Instead of upgrading the system libxml2.
    If someone actually *needs* XML support for whatever they are doing, and
    they have absolutely no option but to upgrade libxml2, they'll do it. It
    doesn't require becoming maintainers of an entirely different code base.

    John
    --
    -~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~-
    John Coggeshall
    john at coggeshall dot org http://www.coggeshall.org/
    -~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~-
  • Zeev Suraski at Jul 1, 2003 at 9:16 am

    At 00:16 28/06/2003, John Coggeshall wrote:
    On Fri, 2003-06-27 at 13:08, Sterling Hughes wrote:
    Because, this will encourage people to do :

    --without-xml

    Instead of upgrading the system libxml2.
    If someone actually *needs* XML support for whatever they are doing, and
    they have absolutely no option but to upgrade libxml2, they'll do it. It
    doesn't require becoming maintainers of an entirely different code base.
    We have no intentions to become maintainers of a different codebase,
    integrating libxml into the PHP distribution is a completely separate
    issue. Please read the archives.

    Zeev
  • John Coggeshall at Jul 1, 2003 at 9:39 am

    We have no intentions to become maintainers of a different codebase,
    integrating libxml into the PHP distribution is a completely separate
    issue. Please read the archives.
    This message must have been stuck in my queue, because i sent this
    Friday. It's outdated, and as far as I care is a dead thread.

    John
    --
    -~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~-
    John Coggeshall
    john at coggeshall dot org http://www.coggeshall.org/
    -~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~--~=~-
  • Rob Richards at Jun 27, 2003 at 5:18 pm
    From: Sterling Hughes
    Hi,

    So I figure I'll restart this discussion. There are a couple of reasons
    I want to bundle libxml2:
    ....

    From yesterday's thread on this, I thought the plan was to bundle for the
    initital beta and see how it goes. Has that plan been scrapped?

    Rob
  • Elfyn McBratney at Jun 27, 2003 at 6:58 pm

    On Fri, 27 Jun 2003, Sterling Hughes wrote:

    Hi,

    So I figure I'll restart this discussion. There are a couple of reasons
    I want to bundle libxml2:

    1) XML support is crucial. You may not like XML, but its the standard
    for data exchange these days, and is incredibly important when
    interoperating with external services. A PHP installation should simply
    not exist without XML support, if it does, then imho we've done
    something wrong. Applications that are distributed need to rely on
    certain features in PHP, XML is one such feature. I think this much has
    already been agreed upon.

    2) Libxml2 may be installed everywhere, but the version we rely upon
    isn't available everywhere. As witnessed by a message to the list by
    michael, and a problem that someone else had over IRC. Its fine to
    allow people to use external versions of libxml2, however, we need a
    recent version to operate. For example, schema support is pretty
    essential, as its becoming the new DTD format for XML (and is required
    for proper SOAP support).

    Its further helpful that users can rely on a certain implementation of
    libxml2 distributed with a certain version of PHP.

    Anyhow, I thought I'd again bring this up before the beta. What do
    people think?
    IMO, bundling libxml2 is a win for PHP. The only bad thing I can see is
    that it add's an extra ~1MG to the distribution. If the user wants to disable
    it, they'd just pass `--disable-xml' to configure, right?

    Elfyn
    --
  • Andi Gutmans at Jun 27, 2003 at 9:03 pm
    I definitely think we should give it a try! +1 for bundling.

    Andi
    At 12:25 PM 27/6/2003 -0400, Sterling Hughes wrote:
    Hi,

    So I figure I'll restart this discussion. There are a couple of reasons
    I want to bundle libxml2:

    1) XML support is crucial. You may not like XML, but its the standard
    for data exchange these days, and is incredibly important when
    interoperating with external services. A PHP installation should simply
    not exist without XML support, if it does, then imho we've done
    something wrong. Applications that are distributed need to rely on
    certain features in PHP, XML is one such feature. I think this much has
    already been agreed upon.

    2) Libxml2 may be installed everywhere, but the version we rely upon
    isn't available everywhere. As witnessed by a message to the list by
    michael, and a problem that someone else had over IRC. Its fine to
    allow people to use external versions of libxml2, however, we need a
    recent version to operate. For example, schema support is pretty
    essential, as its becoming the new DTD format for XML (and is required
    for proper SOAP support).

    Its further helpful that users can rely on a certain implementation of
    libxml2 distributed with a certain version of PHP.

    Anyhow, I thought I'd again bring this up before the beta. What do
    people think?

    -Sterling

    --
    Good judgement comes from experience, and experience comes from
    bad judgement.
    - Fred Brooks

    --
    PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
    To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
  • Maxim Maletsky at Jun 28, 2003 at 5:42 am

    On 27 Jun 2003 12:25:39 -0400 Sterling Hughes wrote:

    Hi,

    So I figure I'll restart this discussion. There are a couple of reasons
    I want to bundle libxml2:

    1) XML support is crucial. You may not like XML, but its the standard
    for data exchange these days, and is incredibly important when
    interoperating with external services. A PHP installation should simply
    not exist without XML support, if it does, then imho we've done
    something wrong. Applications that are distributed need to rely on
    certain features in PHP, XML is one such feature. I think this much has
    already been agreed upon.

    2) Libxml2 may be installed everywhere, but the version we rely upon
    isn't available everywhere. As witnessed by a message to the list by
    michael, and a problem that someone else had over IRC. Its fine to
    allow people to use external versions of libxml2, however, we need a
    recent version to operate. For example, schema support is pretty
    essential, as its becoming the new DTD format for XML (and is required
    for proper SOAP support).

    Its further helpful that users can rely on a certain implementation of
    libxml2 distributed with a certain version of PHP.

    Anyhow, I thought I'd again bring this up before the beta. What do
    people think?

    I am +1 on bundling libxml2.

    I think Sterling is right - PHP should have a decent XML support "by
    default". XML is truly used a lot around the web development today, and
    I think PHP needs a better competitiveness to other languages, XML-wise.


    --
    Maxim Maletsky
    maxim@php.net
  • Adam Dickmeiss at Jun 29, 2003 at 7:28 pm

    On Fri, Jun 27, 2003 at 12:25:39PM -0400, Sterling Hughes wrote:
    Hi,

    So I figure I'll restart this discussion. There are a couple of reasons
    I want to bundle libxml2:

    1) XML support is crucial. You may not like XML, but its the standard
    for data exchange these days, and is incredibly important when
    interoperating with external services. A PHP installation should simply
    not exist without XML support, if it does, then imho we've done
    something wrong. Applications that are distributed need to rely on
    certain features in PHP, XML is one such feature. I think this much has
    already been agreed upon.
    If libxml2 is required , then require it. The 1-3 % of Unix users
    that don't have it installed should be able to install libxml2
    themselves.. It is easy. The windows users rarely compile PHP
    themselves, so they won't notice anyway.

    What's more is that the libxml2 as an external package is usually built
    with both iconv and zlib support. Is iconv and zlib going to be
    bundled too?
    2) Libxml2 may be installed everywhere, but the version we rely upon
    isn't available everywhere. As witnessed by a message to the list by
    michael, and a problem that someone else had over IRC. Its fine to
    allow people to use external versions of libxml2, however, we need a
    recent version to operate. For example, schema support is pretty
    essential, as its becoming the new DTD format for XML (and is required
    for proper SOAP support).
    You're on a grey area when you try to mix the same dynamic/static libraries
    of differnt versions within one executable. ext/yaz (yaz) is going to suffer
    from it sooner or later. In fact any library using libxml2 may be suffering
    from it.

    How about libxslt which is uses libxml2 too. libxslt may be linked
    with the dynamic one, but during run time it is actually using the
    bundled libxml2 from PHP ! Bottomline is that it becomes difficult which
    one is using which one. And difficult to debut too.

    Shared libs are wonderful but there is not the error message:
    "symbol multiple defined". I bet in the future (if not already) there
    are other "sub" libraries using very useful lib libxml2.

    If there are -well-defined- rules for this, I'd like to know, so that
    I can deal with it..
    Its further helpful that users can rely on a certain implementation of
    libxml2 distributed with a certain version of PHP.

    Anyhow, I thought I'd again bring this up before the beta. What do
    people think?

    -Sterling

    --
    Good judgement comes from experience, and experience comes from
    bad judgement.
    - Fred Brooks

    --
    PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
    To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
    --
    Adam Dickmeiss mailto:adam@indexdata.dk http://www.indexdata.dk
    Index Data T: +45 33410100 Mob.: 212 212 66

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
groupphp-internals @
categoriesphp
postedJun 27, '03 at 4:34p
activeJul 1, '03 at 9:39a
posts16
users12
websitephp.net

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2022 Grokbase