|
Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email hr@neohapsis.com |
php-general Digest 15 Nov 2005 22:24:39 -0000 Issue 3796
php-general-digest-help
lists.php.net
Date: Tue Nov 15 2005 - 16:24:39 CST
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
php-general Digest 15 Nov 2005 22:24:39 -0000 Issue 3796
Topics (messages 225809 through 225877):
Re: Newbie to PHP5
225809 by: Jochem Maas
225810 by: Raz
225812 by: Danny
225813 by: Raz
225815 by: Marcus Bointon
Re: php session in ie
225811 by: sunaram patir
Re: Zend + Eclipse + Standized Framework
225814 by: GamblerZG
225818 by: Greg Donald
compiling php to use imagettftext
225816 by: Jason
225833 by: Jason
Is echo tag reasonably portable?
225817 by: Roman Ivanov
225822 by: Robin Vickery
225823 by: Roman Ivanov
225824 by: Jochem Maas
225825 by: John Nichel
225827 by: Jim Moseby
225829 by: lonewolf.nc.rr.com
225831 by: Leonard Burton
225836 by: lonewolf.nc.rr.com
225839 by: Jochem Maas
225840 by: John Nichel
225841 by: Greg Donald
225844 by: Jim Moseby
225845 by: Richard Davey
225846 by: Michael Crute
225847 by: Richard Davey
225848 by: Richard Lynch
225849 by: Miles Thompson
225851 by: Curt Zirzow
225853 by: Robin Vickery
225854 by: John Nichel
225857 by: Robin Vickery
225858 by: Greg Donald
225859 by: Dan Lowe
225860 by: Richard Davey
225861 by: Robin Vickery
225864 by: Jim Moseby
225867 by: Robin Vickery
225870 by: Jim Moseby
225877 by: Greg Donald
网络商机能与传统商机结合起来吗?BA188,上网别忘了我
225819 by: lqztgsxxz3
PHP Framework
225820 by: Yonatan Ben-Nes
225821 by: Richard Davey
225826 by: Yonatan Ben-Nes
225838 by: Robert Cummings
225843 by: Yonatan Ben-Nes
225856 by: Alessandro Rossini
Validating Email addrs
225828 by: Leonard Burton
225832 by: Greg Donald
225834 by: Richard Heyes
225835 by: Matt Stone
225837 by: Leonard Burton
Deatailed Email Publishing Record
225830 by: Chirantan Ghosh
Sending arrays from page to page
225842 by: Ben Miller
225855 by: Dan Lowe
Virtual Directory Support
225850 by: Brad Glonka
225852 by: Jay Blanchard
225866 by: Brad Glonka
225868 by: Jay Blanchard
225869 by: Jasper Bryant-Greene
225871 by: Curt Zirzow
225873 by: Jasper Bryant-Greene
225874 by: Brad Glonka
wierd error
225862 by: Ross
225863 by: Jay Blanchard
Catch warnings
225865 by: Mariano Guadagnini
Error "Command failed for target 'ext/xml/xml.lo'" during make process (Solaris 8)
225872 by: Age Bosma
Regex for Amateur Radio Callsigns
225875 by: Leonard Burton
Shared Memory Problem
225876 by: Yaswanth Narvaneni
Administrivia:
To subscribe to the digest, e-mail:
php-general-digest-subscribelists.php.net
To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail:
php-general-digest-unsubscribelists.php.net
To post to the list, e-mail:
php-generallists.php.net
----------------------------------------------------------------------
attached mail follows:
Danny wrote:
> Hi there,
> I磎 familiar with PHP syntax, but I磛e been reading some sample scripts, in
> PHP5 and i磛e seen some "strange" things, like diferent ways to read a
> collection of rows, magic functions, wrapers, and operators like "::" and
> "->". I know that all is the manual, but before that anyone nows, a website
> or a simple tutorial or explained samples, in order that the transition from
> PHP4 and PHP5 were easiest as possible.
dictionary.com ('nows'? you mean 'knows'?)
and for the rest, please pull a digit from you deriere and visit a search engine:
http://www.google.nl/search?q=php5+beginners+tutorial
there is no substitute for reading the manual - no instant matrix-like download
straight into your head. so given you know everything you want is in the manual
f***ing read it.
actually there is an alternative - find a good php5 programmer and pay him/her
to teach you. ( 50-100 euros/hour).... makes the manual look more appealing if
nothing else.
> Thanks
>
> --
> dpc
>
attached mail follows:
> "->". I know that all is the manual, but before that anyone nows, a website
> or a simple tutorial or explained samples, in order that the transition from
> PHP4 and PHP5 were easiest as possible.
http://www.php.net/
attached mail follows:
Thanks.
Any other source (some resume pdf or something like "What磗 new")
On 11/15/05, Raz <raz.netgmail.com> wrote:
>
> > "->". I know that all is the manual, but before that anyone nows, a
> website
> > or a simple tutorial or explained samples, in order that the transition
> from
> > PHP4 and PHP5 were easiest as possible.
>
> http://www.php.net/
>
--
dpc
attached mail follows:
http://uk2.php.net/manual/en/migration5.php
attached mail follows:
On 15 Nov 2005, at 10:06, Danny wrote:
> I磎 familiar with PHP syntax, but I磛e been reading some sample
> scripts, in
> PHP5 and i磛e seen some "strange" things, like diferent ways to read a
> collection of rows, magic functions, wrapers, and operators like
> "::" and
> "->". I know that all is the manual, but before that anyone nows, a
> website
> or a simple tutorial or explained samples, in order that the
> transition from
> PHP4 and PHP5 were easiest as possible.
Many of the things you mention are not new in PHP5. This will help:
http://www.zend.com/php5/migration.php
If you want a book:
http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/upgradephp5/
Marcus
--
Marcus Bointon
Synchromedia Limited: Putting you in the picture
marcussynchromedia.co.uk | http://www.synchromedia.co.uk
attached mail follows:
On 11/14/05, Ford, Mike <M.Fordleedsmet.ac.uk> wrote:
> On 11 November 2005 18:47, sunaram patir wrote:
>
> > array(1) { ["PHPSESSID"]=> string(32)
> > "337a44c0d6c9ed3cf4ba4e97d707589e" } is returned by firefox on calling
> > var_dump($_COOKIE). NULL in ie.
>
> If the very same piece of PHP produces different results in different browsers, this *MUST* be due to differences between the browsers. It could be due to settings in the browsers, or it might simply be a bug in one or the other -- but it can NOT NOT NOT be down to PHP. (Well, except inasmuch as you might be able to make reasonable adjustments in your PHP to allow for the difference. ;)
>
> Cheers!
>
> Mike
>
"Fuck you bill gates! Fuck your ie!" bye!
attached mail follows:
Greg Donald wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-11-14 at 03:55 -0500, Roman Ivanov wrote:
>
>>What features do you need from a framework?
>
> Convention over configuration. (Yaml, not XML. ActiveRecord not
> Propel/Phing.)
Hard to do in pure PHP. But I tried:
http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/naturalgine/NECMS_0_3/tools/ori.php?rev=1.1.1.1&view=markup
> A persist-able domain model where logic and data are presented in one
> wrapping. (I don't want to re-assign my data in the view for use in the
> template after it's already ready already in the controller, pointless.)
Don't know what you're talking about. Example?
> A database-agnostic database abstraction layer capable of using database
> meta data effectively. (Why am I still writing SQL?)
LOL. What you really want is a built-in high-performance object-oriented
database with decent OO interface. So far I hacked this thing, using MySQL:
http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/naturalgine/NECMS_0_3/tools/nodes.php?rev=1.2&view=markup
When I port the whole thing to PHP 5, I will try to make it to use PDO.
> Ajax, built-in. (Cause all the cool kids are using it.)
Will be done some day. Right now, you can use AJAX all you want, but you
have to code it yourself.
attached mail follows:
On Tue, 15 Nov 2005, GamblerZG wrote:
>> Convention over configuration. (Yaml, not XML. ActiveRecord not
>> Propel/Phing.)
>
> Hard to do in pure PHP. But I tried:
>
> http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/naturalgine/NECMS_0_3/tools/ori.php?rev=1.1.1.1&view=markup
Maybe Zend will get it right where all the previous attempts I've
seen/used are less than great. I read some blog posts on the topic
last night and it scared me a bit. I read stuff like 'now we have to
write the glue that holds it all together.' I'm withholding final
judgement until I see it, but to me sounds like it's gonna be messy to
work with. I gotta think if anyone can make a top notch PHP framework it
should be Zend. We'll see.
>> A persist-able domain model where logic and data are presented in one
>> wrapping. (I don't want to re-assign my data in the view for use in the
>> template after it's already ready already in the controller, pointless.)
>
> Don't know what you're talking about. Example?
Specifically I'm referring to Mojavi, or Agavi or whatever its name is
this week. You pull data into the controller, then you have to reassign
it in the view before you can use it in the template. I ended up
sticking everything in a single array just to save keystrokes when
passing stuff around, but then that turned out to be messy when dealing
with lots of differently structured arrays on a single page.
>> A database-agnostic database abstraction layer capable of using database
>> meta data effectively. (Why am I still writing SQL?)
>
> LOL. What you really want is a built-in high-performance object-oriented
> database with decent OO interface. So far I hacked this thing, using MySQL:
>
> http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/naturalgine/NECMS_0_3/tools/nodes.php?rev=1.2&view=markup
If it's show and tell time then here's what I've been using the past few
months:
http://api.rubyonrails.com/classes/ActiveRecord/Base.html
So far I've used it with Oracle, PostgreSQL, MySQL and SQLite. Hardly
every have to write any custom SQL. Intelligent table relations are
built-in using model relationship statements.
> When I port the whole thing to PHP 5, I will try to make it to use PDO.
>
>> Ajax, built-in. (Cause all the cool kids are using it.)
>
> Will be done some day. Right now, you can use AJAX all you want, but you have
> to code it yourself.
Not really, it's builtin to Rubyonrails. Very simple to use:
http://www.onlamp.com/pub/a/onlamp/2005/06/09/rails_ajax.html
--
Greg Donald
Zend Certified Engineer
MySQL Core Certification
http://destiney.com/
attached mail follows:
been fighting this for a while but can find no definitave docs that say how exactly and with
what options are needed to enable this..
Here is what Im using for my config
./configure -v --with-oci8=/apps/oracle --with-apxs=/local/apache-1333/bin/apxs
--with-gd=/local/stuff --with-mysql=/local/stuff --with-curl --with-imap=/local/jason/imap-2002d
--with-config-file-path=/local/apache/libexec --enable-bcmath --enable-calendar --with-zlib
--with-dom --with-db4=/local/stuff --with-dba --with-gettext --with-iconv
--with-mcrypt=/local/stuff --with-openssl=/local/stuff --with-mcal=/local/jason/libmcal
--with-curl=/local/stuff --with-jpeg-dir=/local/stuff --with-png-dir=/local/stuff
--with-ldap=/local/stuff --enable-gd-native-ttf --with-ttf=/local/stuff
--with-xpm-dir=/local/stuff/X11
and im using
freetype-2.1.10 gd-2.0.33
but cannot get it working..
Heres what the libphp.so looks like
[jason481]$ ldd libphp4.so
libcrypt_i.so.1 => /usr/lib/libcrypt_i.so.1
libmcal.so => /local/jason/libmcal/libmcal.so
libmysqlclient.so.10 => /local/stuff/lib/mysql/libmysqlclient.so.10
libmcrypt.so.4 => /local/stuff/lib/libmcrypt.so.4
libltdl.so.3 => /local/stuff/lib/libltdl.so.3
libldap-2.3.so.0 => /local/stuff/lib/libldap-2.3.so.0
liblber-2.3.so.0 => /local/stuff/lib/liblber-2.3.so.0
libpam.so.1 => /usr/lib/libpam.so.1
libintl.so.1 => /usr/lib/libintl.so.1
libgd.so.2 => /local/stuff/lib/libgd.so.2
libX11.so.4 => /usr/lib/libX11.so.4
libXpm.so.4.11 => /local/stuff/X11/lib/libXpm.so.4.11
libpng.so.3 => /local/stuff/lib/libpng.so.3
libz.so => /local/stuff/lib/libz.so
libjpeg.so.62 => /local/stuff/lib/libjpeg.so.62
libdb-4.3.so => /local/stuff/lib/libdb-4.3.so
libssl.so.0.9.7 => /local/stuff/lib/libssl.so.0.9.7
libcrypto.so.0.9.7 => /local/stuff/lib/libcrypto.so.0.9.7
libresolv.so.2 => /usr/lib/libresolv.so.2
libm.so.1 => /usr/lib/libm.so.1
libdl.so.1 => /usr/lib/libdl.so.1
libnsl.so.1 => /usr/lib/libnsl.so.1
libsocket.so.1 => /usr/lib/libsocket.so.1
libcurl.so.3 => /local/stuff/lib/libcurl.so.3
libxml2.so.2 => /usr/lib/libxml2.so.2
libgen.so.1 => /usr/lib/libgen.so.1
libsched.so.1 => /usr/lib/libsched.so.1
libclntsh.so.8.0 => /apps/oracle/lib/libclntsh.so.8.0
libc.so.1 => /usr/lib/libc.so.1
libz.so.1 => /usr/lib/libz.so.1
/opt/local/gcc/3.4.2/lib/libgcc_s.so.1
libcmd.so.1 => /usr/lib/libcmd.so.1
libfreetype.so.6 => /local/stuff/lib/libfreetype.so.6
libpng12.so.0 => /local/stuff/lib/libpng12.so.0
libXext.so.0 => /usr/openwin/lib/libXext.so.0
librt.so.1 => /usr/lib/librt.so.1
libmp.so.2 => /usr/lib/libmp.so.2
libpthread.so.1 => /usr/lib/libpthread.so.1
libwtc8.so => /apps/oracle-8.1.7/lib/libwtc8.so
libaio.so.1 => /usr/lib/libaio.so.1
/usr/platform/SUNW,UltraAX-e2/lib/libc_psr.so.1
libthread.so.1 => /usr/lib/libthread.so.1
but looking at the
PHPinfo page, under GD section, it says
GD Support enabled
GD Version 2.0 or higher
GIF Read Support enabled
GIF Create Support enabled
JPG Support enabled
PNG Support enabled
WBMP Support enabled
shouldnt it say something about freetype being enabled if done right?
Jason
attached mail follows:
seems like as soon as I post to the list, I end up figgereing it out..
anyway, heres what ended up working.
./configure -v --with-oci8=/apps/oracle --with-apxs=/local/apache-1333/bin/apxs
--with-gd=/local/stuff --with-mysql=/local/stuff --with-curl --with-imap=/local/jason/imap-2002d
--with-config-file-path=/local/apache/libexec --enable-bcmath --enable-calendar --with-zlib
--with-dom --with-db4=/local/stuff --with-dba --with-gettext --with-iconv
--with-mcrypt=/local/stuff --with-openssl=/local/stuff --with-mcal=/local/jason/libmcal
--with-curl=/local/stuff --with-jpeg-dir=/local/stuff --with-png-dir=/local/stuff
--with-ldap=/local/stuff --enable-gd-native-ttf --with-ttf --with-xpm-dir=/local/stuff/X11
--with-freetype-dir=/local/stuff
Jason
attached mail follows:
Can '<?=' be used for templates, or is it "a bad thing"?
attached mail follows:
On 11/15/05, Roman Ivanov <gamblergluckyahoo.com> wrote:
> Can '<?=' be used for templates, or is it "a bad thing"?
The manual's reasonably explicit on the subject:
"Note: Using short tags should be avoided when developing
applications or libraries that are meant for redistribution, or
deployment on PHP servers which are not under your control, because
short tags may not be supported on the target server. For portable,
redistributable code, be sure not to use short tags."
-robin
attached mail follows:
Robin Vickery wrote:
> On 11/15/05, Roman Ivanov <gamblergluckyahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>Can '<?=' be used for templates, or is it "a bad thing"?
>
>
> The manual's reasonably explicit on the subject:
>
> "Note: Using short tags should be avoided when developing
> applications or libraries that are meant for redistribution, or
> deployment on PHP servers which are not under your control, because
> short tags may not be supported on the target server. For portable,
> redistributable code, be sure not to use short tags."
I've seen this note. But I haven't seen a single server where short tags
were disabled.
attached mail follows:
Robin Vickery wrote:
> On 11/15/05, Roman Ivanov <gamblergluckyahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>Can '<?=' be used for templates, or is it "a bad thing"?
>
>
> The manual's reasonably explicit on the subject:
>
> "Note: Using short tags should be avoided when developing
> applications or libraries that are meant for redistribution, or
> deployment on PHP servers which are not under your control, because
> short tags may not be supported on the target server. For portable,
> redistributable code, be sure not to use short tags."
they are correct - but I have never used a server that didn't allow
short tags in practice. personally I say screw portability for the sake
of readability/maintainability, besides short_open_tag is:
PHP_INI_PERDIR 2 Entry can be set in php.ini, .htaccess or httpd.conf
so you can always have you app init script (or tempalte class or whatever)
set the setting how you want it.
as always it up to you (Roman).
>
>
> -robin
>
attached mail follows:
Roman Ivanov wrote:
> Robin Vickery wrote:
>
>> On 11/15/05, Roman Ivanov <gamblergluckyahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Can '<?=' be used for templates, or is it "a bad thing"?
>>
>>
>>
>> The manual's reasonably explicit on the subject:
>>
>> "Note: Using short tags should be avoided when developing
>> applications or libraries that are meant for redistribution, or
>> deployment on PHP servers which are not under your control, because
>> short tags may not be supported on the target server. For portable,
>> redistributable code, be sure not to use short tags."
>
>
> I've seen this note. But I haven't seen a single server where short tags
> were disabled.
Look at any box I have set up. Not to mention the fact that chances
are, you've probably only 'seen' a fraction of the existing php enabled
web servers out there
--
John C. Nichel IV
Programmer/System Admin (躡erGeek)
Dot Com Holdings of Buffalo
716.856.9675
jnicheldotcomholdingsofbuffalo.com
attached mail follows:
>
> Robin Vickery wrote:
> > On 11/15/05, Roman Ivanov <gamblergluckyahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >>Can '<?=' be used for templates, or is it "a bad thing"?
> >
> >
> > The manual's reasonably explicit on the subject:
> >
> > "Note: Using short tags should be avoided when developing
> > applications or libraries that are meant for redistribution, or
> > deployment on PHP servers which are not under your control, because
> > short tags may not be supported on the target server. For portable,
> > redistributable code, be sure not to use short tags."
>
> I've seen this note. But I haven't seen a single server where
> short tags
> were disabled.
Nor have I. However, if I use long tags, my script will *always* work. If
I use short tags there is a *possibility* that it won't. So, when writing
code that is required to be portable, there is no reason to ever use short
tags.
JM
attached mail follows:
Every server I work on is set to not allow short tags, and I work on
about 7 different state, federal, and commercial ones. Some of them
don't even read .htaccess files in the directories where my scripts
reside, so trying that type of hack would get you booted.
just my $.02
attached mail follows:
HI All,
> Every server I work on is set to not allow short tags, and I work on
> about 7 different state, federal, and commercial ones.
Why turn off short tags? Does that make things more secure?
Thanks,
--
Leonard Burton, N9URK
leonardburtongmail.com
"The prolonged evacuation would have dramatically affected the
survivability of the occupants."
attached mail follows:
> > Every server I work on is set to not allow short tags, and I work on
> > about 7 different state, federal, and commercial ones.
>
> Why turn off short tags? Does that make things more secure?
In some respects it does because it means shortcuts are not allowed, it
also means that someone trying to hack through your site is going to be
held to a higher standard (ASP tags are cut off as well, the only thing
recognized and executed is PHP). Even CGI scripts reside in their own
directory and are called/executed from others.
for instance most of my scripts/functions are run from a
/share/php/functions directory instead of from the spot on the server.
Portability. :)
attached mail follows:
Jim Moseby wrote:
>>Robin Vickery wrote:
>>
>>>On 11/15/05, Roman Ivanov <gamblergluckyahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Can '<?=' be used for templates, or is it "a bad thing"?
>>>
>>>
>>>The manual's reasonably explicit on the subject:
>>>
>>>"Note: Using short tags should be avoided when developing
>>>applications or libraries that are meant for redistribution, or
>>>deployment on PHP servers which are not under your control, because
>>>short tags may not be supported on the target server. For portable,
>>>redistributable code, be sure not to use short tags."
>>
>>I've seen this note. But I haven't seen a single server where
>>short tags
>>were disabled.
>
>
> Nor have I. However, if I use long tags, my script will *always* work. If
> I use short tags there is a *possibility* that it won't. So, when writing
> code that is required to be portable, there is no reason to ever use short
> tags.
so how many people actually _need_ to write portable code? ok so many you
are starting a project which will become a runaway success but until it starts
receiving alot of attention use of short-open-tags is probably not your biggest
issue either.
lets assume that everyone should be writing completely portable apps, why does this
ini setting exist? what is the point of offering a setting that can be set to a
bad(tm) value by design?
>
> JM
>
attached mail follows:
Leonard Burton wrote:
> HI All,
>
>
>>Every server I work on is set to not allow short tags, and I work on
>>about 7 different state, federal, and commercial ones.
>
>
> Why turn off short tags? Does that make things more secure?
Don't know if it makes it any more or less secure. I turn them off
because I don't use them (I also disable quite a few functions that we
don't use). Idea being that if it's not needed, don't make it available
to be exploited (if an exploit exists now or in the future).
--
John C. Nichel IV
Programmer/System Admin (躡erGeek)
Dot Com Holdings of Buffalo
716.856.9675
jnicheldotcomholdingsofbuffalo.com
attached mail follows:
On Tue, 15 Nov 2005, lonewolfnc.rr.com wrote:
> In some respects it does because it means shortcuts are not allowed, it
> also means that someone trying to hack through your site is going to be
> held to a higher standard (ASP tags are cut off as well, the only thing
Most PHP site exploits I've seen are written in Perl and do not run on
the server being exploited. I've seen a few written in Python, but
never have I seen one written in PHP or ASP.
Short tags have nothing to do with security.
--
Greg Donald
Zend Certified Engineer
MySQL Core Certification
http://destiney.com/
attached mail follows:
>
> Jim Moseby wrote:
> >>Robin Vickery wrote:
> >>
> >>>On 11/15/05, Roman Ivanov <gamblergluckyahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Can '<?=' be used for templates, or is it "a bad thing"?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>The manual's reasonably explicit on the subject:
> >>>
> >>>"Note: Using short tags should be avoided when developing
> >>>applications or libraries that are meant for redistribution, or
> >>>deployment on PHP servers which are not under your control, because
> >>>short tags may not be supported on the target server. For portable,
> >>>redistributable code, be sure not to use short tags."
> >>
> >>I've seen this note. But I haven't seen a single server where
> >>short tags
> >>were disabled.
> >
> >
> > Nor have I. However, if I use long tags, my script will
> *always* work. If
> > I use short tags there is a *possibility* that it won't.
> So, when writing
> > code that is required to be portable, there is no reason to
> ever use short
> > tags.
>
> so how many people actually _need_ to write portable code?
I don't know, but those who do should not use short tags. And those who
hope to should not get into the habit of using short tags.
> ok
> so many you
> are starting a project which will become a runaway success
> but until it starts
> receiving alot of attention use of short-open-tags is
> probably not your biggest
> issue either.
It will be when you have to sort through 1,000,000 lines of code in 400
files to change '<?' to '<?PHP'. Better to save the grief and do it right
to start with, no?
>
> lets assume that everyone should be writing completely
> portable apps, why does this
> ini setting exist? what is the point of offering a setting
> that can be set to a
> bad(tm) value by design?
I don't know. A very good question for the PHP architects. :o)
JM
attached mail follows:
Hi Jochem,
Tuesday, November 15, 2005, 4:34:28 PM, you wrote:
> so how many people actually _need_ to write portable code? ok so
> many you are starting a project which will become a runaway success
> but until it starts receiving alot of attention use of
> short-open-tags is probably not your biggest issue either.
heh :) I have to admit I was thinking the same thing. I use short-tags
and always enable them, I specifically like the <?=$blah alias.
I cannot see any more security risks from allowing <? as from allowing
<?php. If you're letting direct PHP code injection into your scripts,
then you've got bigger things to worry about than if the hacker will
use a short-tag or not!
Cheers,
Rich
--
Zend Certified Engineer
PHP Development Services
http://www.corephp.co.uk
attached mail follows:
On 11/15/05, Jochem Maas <jochemiamjochem.com> wrote:
>
> Jim Moseby wrote:
> >>Robin Vickery wrote:
> >>
> >>>On 11/15/05, Roman Ivanov <gamblergluckyahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Can '<?=' be used for templates, or is it "a bad thing"?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>The manual's reasonably explicit on the subject:
> >>>
> >>>"Note: Using short tags should be avoided when developing
> >>>applications or libraries that are meant for redistribution, or
> >>>deployment on PHP servers which are not under your control, because
> >>>short tags may not be supported on the target server. For portable,
> >>>redistributable code, be sure not to use short tags."
> >>
> >>I've seen this note. But I haven't seen a single server where
> >>short tags
> >>were disabled.
> >
> >
> > Nor have I. However, if I use long tags, my script will *always* work.
> If
> > I use short tags there is a *possibility* that it won't. So, when
> writing
> > code that is required to be portable, there is no reason to ever use
> short
> > tags.
>
> so how many people actually _need_ to write portable code? ok so many you
> are starting a project which will become a runaway success but until it
> starts
> receiving alot of attention use of short-open-tags is probably not your
> biggest
> issue either.
>
> lets assume that everyone should be writing completely portable apps, why
> does this
> ini setting exist? what is the point of offering a setting that can be set
> to a
> bad(tm) value by design?
>
>
Its just a best practice similar to setting error reporting to E_STRICT on
development web servers. Why is it such a big deal anyhow, just type the
three extra characters and get it over with. You could also use smarty to
avoid putting PHP in your templates at all.
I will throw in my vote for short open tags = off on the roughly 30 servers
that I administer across various organizations.
-Mike
--
________________________________
Michael E. Crute
Software Developer
SoftGroup Development Corporation
Linux takes junk and turns it into something useful.
Windows takes something useful and turns it into junk.
attached mail follows:
Hi Jim,
Tuesday, November 15, 2005, 5:25:58 PM, you wrote:
> I don't know, but those who do should not use short tags. And those
> who hope to should not get into the habit of using short tags.
And for the vast majority remaining, who write closed-apps for
clients??
> It will be when you have to sort through 1,000,000 lines of code in
> 400 files to change '<?' to '<?PHP'. Better to save the grief and do
> it right to start with, no?
There is no "right" or "wrong" for this, it's down to personal
developer preference. Nothing more, nothing less. It's only "right" if
you're building an app for distribution to unknown end-users. I don't
think that covers the majority of work we all do here somehow.
Cheers,
Rich
--
Zend Certified Engineer
PHP Development Services
http://www.corephp.co.uk
attached mail follows:
On Tue, November 15, 2005 11:35 am, Richard Davey wrote:
> Tuesday, November 15, 2005, 4:34:28 PM, you wrote:
>> so how many people actually _need_ to write portable code? ok so
>> many you are starting a project which will become a runaway success
>> but until it starts receiving alot of attention use of
>> short-open-tags is probably not your biggest issue either.
>
> heh :) I have to admit I was thinking the same thing. I use short-tags
> and always enable them, I specifically like the <?=$blah alias.
>
> I cannot see any more security risks from allowing <? as from allowing
> <?php. If you're letting direct PHP code injection into your scripts,
> then you've got bigger things to worry about than if the hacker will
> use a short-tag or not!
I don't really mind about <? versus <?php, cuz I can cope either way.
I even find <?php a bit more readable, for some reason.
But I sure wish <?= would work even without short_tags on.
As I understand it, <? needed to go away because of XHTML, no?
But is <?= a valid beginning for XML/XHTML?
If not, why did it get lumped in with short_tags?
[shrug]
--
Like Music?
http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm
attached mail follows:
At 01:25 PM 11/15/2005, Jim Moseby wrote:
> >
> > Jim Moseby wrote:
> > >>Robin Vickery wrote:
> > >>
> > >>>On 11/15/05, Roman Ivanov <gamblergluckyahoo.com> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>Can '<?=' be used for templates, or is it "a bad thing"?
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>The manual's reasonably explicit on the subject:
> > >>>
> > >>>"Note: Using short tags should be avoided when developing
> > >>>applications or libraries that are meant for redistribution, or
> > >>>deployment on PHP servers which are not under your control, because
> > >>>short tags may not be supported on the target server. For portable,
> > >>>redistributable code, be sure not to use short tags."
> > >>
> > >>I've seen this note. But I haven't seen a single server where
> > >>short tags
> > >>were disabled.
> > >
> > >
> > > Nor have I. However, if I use long tags, my script will
> > *always* work. If
> > > I use short tags there is a *possibility* that it won't.
> > So, when writing
> > > code that is required to be portable, there is no reason to
> > ever use short
> > > tags.
> >
> > so how many people actually _need_ to write portable code?
>
>I don't know, but those who do should not use short tags. And those who
>hope to should not get into the habit of using short tags.
>
> > ok
> > so many you
> > are starting a project which will become a runaway success
> > but until it starts
> > receiving alot of attention use of short-open-tags is
> > probably not your biggest
> > issue either.
>
>It will be when you have to sort through 1,000,000 lines of code in 400
>files to change '<?' to '<?PHP'. Better to save the grief and do it right
>to start with, no?
>
> >
> > lets assume that everyone should be writing completely
> > portable apps, why does this
> > ini setting exist? what is the point of offering a setting
> > that can be set to a
> > bad(tm) value by design?
>
>I don't know. A very good question for the PHP architects. :o)
>
>JM
>
Re 1,000,000 lines .... awk, sed, UltraEdit?
Miles
attached mail follows:
On Tue, Nov 15, 2005 at 05:39:36PM +0000, Richard Davey wrote:
> Hi Jim,
>
> Tuesday, November 15, 2005, 5:25:58 PM, you wrote:
>
> > I don't know, but those who do should not use short tags. And those
> > who hope to should not get into the habit of using short tags.
>
> And for the vast majority remaining, who write closed-apps for
> clients??
>
> > It will be when you have to sort through 1,000,000 lines of code in
> > 400 files to change '<?' to '<?PHP'. Better to save the grief and do
> > it right to start with, no?
>
> There is no "right" or "wrong" for this, it's down to personal
> developer preference. Nothing more, nothing less. It's only "right" if
> you're building an app for distribution to unknown end-users. I don't
> think that covers the majority of work we all do here somehow.
There is the issue if you are dealing with xml, consider php script is:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding....?>
<? echo $something_xml_ish ?>
which is exactly why <?php was born.
Curt.
--
attached mail follows:
On 11/15/05, Jochem Maas <jochemiamjochem.com> wrote:
>
> so how many people actually _need_ to write portable code? ok so many you
> are starting a project which will become a runaway success but until it starts
> receiving alot of attention use of short-open-tags is probably not your biggest
> issue either.
I'm lazy. I prefer to do it right the first time so I don't have to go
through thousands of lines of code correcting it.
> lets assume that everyone should be writing completely portable apps, why does this
> ini setting exist? what is the point of offering a setting that can be set to a
> bad(tm) value by design?
Back-compatibility.
Short tags were around before the long form and millions of scripts
were already using them by the time the xml/xhtml issue became
apparent.
Security really doesn't have anything to do with this.
Short tags have been deprecated for years. Both the manual and the
php.ini file itself advise people not to use them. Personally I think
it's about time they were turned off by default, but that's bound to
annoy a lot of people who've ignored the warnings.
-robin
attached mail follows:
Robin Vickery wrote:
<snip>
> Short tags have been deprecated for years. Both the manual and the
> php.ini file itself advise people not to use them. Personally I think
> it's about time they were turned off by default, but that's bound to
> annoy a lot of people who've ignored the warnings.
Hey, we need another 'register_globals' type flood of the mailing list
again. ;)
--
John C. Nichel IV
Programmer/System Admin (躡erGeek)
Dot Com Holdings of Buffalo
716.856.9675
jnicheldotcomholdingsofbuffalo.com
attached mail follows:
On 11/15/05, Roman Ivanov <gamblergluckyahoo.com> wrote:
> Robin Vickery wrote:
> > On 11/15/05, Roman Ivanov <gamblergluckyahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >>Can '<?=' be used for templates, or is it "a bad thing"?
> >
> >
> > The manual's reasonably explicit on the subject:
> >
> > "Note: Using short tags should be avoided when developing
> > applications or libraries that are meant for redistribution, or
> > deployment on PHP servers which are not under your control, because
> > short tags may not be supported on the target server. For portable,
> > redistributable code, be sure not to use short tags."
>
> I've seen this note. But I haven't seen a single server where short tags
> were disabled.
If you've seen this note, then why did you need to ask?
It doesn't really matter whether you've seen a server where short tags
are disabled, just the possibility that they won't work means they're
not portable. Long tags always work.
Many experienced sysadmins automatically disable everything that's not
needed, and short tags definitely come under that heading.
-robin
attached mail follows:
On Tue, 15 Nov 2005, Jim Moseby wrote:
> It will be when you have to sort through 1,000,000 lines of code in 400
> files to change '<?' to '<?PHP'. Better to save the grief and do it right
> to start with, no?
for file in *.php; do
cp $file $file.tmp
sed -e "s/<?$/<?php/g" $file.tmp >$file
rm $file.tmp
done
--
Greg Donald
Zend Certified Engineer
MySQL Core Certification
http://destiney.com/
attached mail follows:
On Nov 15, 2005, at 8:39 AM, Greg Donald wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Nov 2005, Jim Moseby wrote:
>
>> It will be when you have to sort through 1,000,000 lines of code
>> in 400
>> files to change '<?' to '<?PHP'. Better to save the grief and do
>> it right
>> to start with, no?
>
> for file in *.php; do
> cp $file $file.tmp
> sed -e "s/<?$/<?php/g" $file.tmp >$file
> rm $file.tmp
> done
... Wouldn't catch this case:
<? echo $foo ?>
-dan
--
Black holes are where God divided by zero. -Steven Wright
attached mail follows:
Hi Robin,
Tuesday, November 15, 2005, 6:18:06 PM, you wrote:
> Short tags have been deprecated for years. Both the manual and the
> php.ini file itself advise people not to use them. Personally I
> think it's about time they were turned off by default, but that's
> bound to annoy a lot of people who've ignored the warnings.
1) They are not deprecated.
2) The manual does not advise people not to use them per se. You're
missing out the entire context in which it advises against them.
3) The php.ini file does not advise people not to use them per se. You're
missing out the entire context in which it advises against them.
I doubt very much if they will be disabled. They are perfectly valid
SGML processing instructions.
I agree they are a legacy of the PHP3 era, and for re-distributable
apps you should avoid them. But that is all. Your statements are, in
their brevity, incorrect.
Cheers,
Rich
--
Zend Certified Engineer
PHP Development Services
http://www.corephp.co.uk
attached mail follows:
On 11/15/05, Greg Donald <destineydestiney.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Nov 2005, Jim Moseby wrote:
>
> > It will be when you have to sort through 1,000,000 lines of code in 400
> > files to change '<?' to '<?PHP'. Better to save the grief and do it right
> > to start with, no?
>
> for file in *.php; do
> cp $file $file.tmp
> sed -e "s/<?$/<?php/g" $file.tmp >$file
> rm $file.tmp
> done
eh, what?
You only have '<?' at the end of a line?
-robin
attached mail follows:
>
> On Tue, 15 Nov 2005, Jim Moseby wrote:
>
> > It will be when you have to sort through 1,000,000 lines of
> code in 400
> > files to change '<?' to '<?PHP'. Better to save the grief
> and do it right
> > to start with, no?
>
> for file in *.php; do
> cp $file $file.tmp
> sed -e "s/<?$/<?php/g" $file.tmp >$file
> rm $file.tmp
> done
I maintain: "Better to save the grief and do it right to start with, no?"
JM
attached mail follows:
Hiyah Richard,
On 11/15/05, Richard Davey <richcorephp.co.uk> wrote:
> Hi Robin,
>
> Tuesday, November 15, 2005, 6:18:06 PM, you wrote:
>
> > Short tags have been deprecated for years. Both the manual and the
> > php.ini file itself advise people not to use them. Personally I
> > think it's about time they were turned off by default, but that's
> > bound to annoy a lot of people who've ignored the warnings.
>
> 1) They are not deprecated.
Granted, deprecated might be putting it a little strong. They are
certainly not encouraged.
I did quote the note concerning them in its entirety. If I had simply
quoted the manual as saying "be sure not to use short tags" then I
could see your point regarding lack of context. But I didn't.
Similarly, what I quoted was the entire text of the php.ini comment.
Short of including the entire php.ini file, I don't see how much more
context I could possibly give.
> I doubt very much if they will be disabled. They are perfectly valid
> SGML processing instructions.
Firstly, I didn't actually suggest they were disabled. I suggested
that they should be off by default. If they're needed then it's simple
to turn them on, but it would discourage new developers from using a
construct which is not compatible with xml and xhtml.
Now I can't argue that it's not valid sgml as I'm not overly familiar
with the sgml standard (in fact I don't recall mentioning sgml at
all), but it's certainly not valid xml or xhtml.
A '<?' must be followed by a processing instruction target, so if you
have php using short tags embedded in an xml document, then the source
is very unlikely to validate.
Also, if you parse an xml document with php with short tags turned on
- php will try to handle every processing instruction, even
instructions for which it is not the target.
This is likely to become more of an issue, not less as xhtml support
in browsers grows.
> I agree they are a legacy of the PHP3 era, and for re-distributable
> apps you should avoid them. But that is all. Your statements are, in
> their brevity, incorrect.
I would dispute that. In fact, I just have.
-robin
attached mail follows:
cho tag reasonably portable?
>
>
> Hi Jim,
Hi Richard.
>
> Tuesday, November 15, 2005, 5:25:58 PM, you wrote:
>
> > I don't know, but those who do should not use short tags. And those
> > who hope to should not get into the habit of using short tags.
>
> And for the vast majority remaining, who write closed-apps for
> clients??
Still best practice is to use long tags. Suppose you write a closed-app for
a client who makes a business decision to move it to a hosted server that
does not allow short tags... The down side is, the app will break. The up
side is, the client will probably call you to fix it, and pay you your
standard rate to do so, unless he is bright enough to realize it was YOUR
fault it broke.
> > It will be when you have to sort through 1,000,000 lines of code in
> > 400 files to change '<?' to '<?PHP'. Better to save the grief and do
> > it right to start with, no?
>
> There is no "right" or "wrong" for this, it's down to personal
> developer preference. Nothing more, nothing less. It's only "right" if
> you're building an app for distribution to unknown end-users. I don't
> think that covers the majority of work we all do here somehow.
You're probably right. Most people will be just fine using short tags. My
only point was to say that , IMO, "Best Practice" trumps "personal developer
preference", no matter what the situation.
JM
attached mail follows:
On Tue, 15 Nov 2005, Jim Moseby wrote:
>> for file in *.php; do
>> cp $file $file.tmp
>> sed -e "s/<?$/<?php/g" $file.tmp >$file
>> rm $file.tmp
>> done
>
> I maintain: "Better to save the grief and do it right to start with, no?"
Maybe at some point I too will be lucky enough to only work on code that
I authored.
for file in *.php; do
cp $file $file.tmp
php -r 'echo preg_replace("/<\?php=\s*/i","<?php echo
",preg_replace("/<\?(?!php)/i","<?php",file_get_contents($argv[1])));'
$file.tmp >$file
rm $file.tmp
done
--
Greg Donald
Zend Certified Engineer
MySQL Core Certification
http://destiney.com/
attached mail follows:
网络商机能与传统商机结合起来吗?思想有多远,行动有多远。
Ba188网站为庞大的创业人群（特别是中小创业者）提供各色创业项目、创业指导、自助创业平台等全面的创业需求服务，为广大的招商、加盟、连锁企业和机构提供丰富的网络服务及产品推广；
5000家企业的最新最快、最有价值的创业信息
餐饮/ 服饰/ 美容健身/ 医疗/ 家饰/ 数码/ 日用/ 汽车/ 科教及娱乐等行业
强大的商机阵容、实时、高效
最丰富、最满意的创业资源
希望有一天你的财源能babbaba......
还能加入网吧联盟、特色MM视频聊天、音乐放送。
看看我们是怎么做到的
http://www.ba188.com
attached mail follows:
Hi All,
I want to start using a framework to my future sites and I saw that
there are quite alot of options out there at the net, if anyone got any
experience with frameworks I would really like to receive some
suggestions, recommenditions and even ideas.
The framework need to achieve the following goals (Doesn't have to be
all of them):
1. Reusability of codes as components.
2. OO.
3. PHP 5.
4. Code & logic should be seperated from design (MVC and such..).
5. Easy to use & learn.
6. Extreme flexibility to handle also special requirements.
7. Easy usage of PEAR.
8. Should have a good living community. (I don't want to choose a
project which will fall in a year...)
I've already saw the following options and I would like to receive
comments about them also:
1. PRADO - http://www.xisc.com/
2. MOJAVI - http://www.mojavi.org/
3. XARAYA - http://www.xaraya.com/index.php
4. FUSEBOX - http://www.fusebox.org/
5. InterJinn - http://www.interjinn.com/about/index.phtml
6. PHP2GO - http://php2go.sourceforge.net/
7. P4A - http://p4a.sourceforge.net/
Thanks in advance,
Yonatan Ben-Nes
attached mail follows:
Hi Yonatan,
Tuesday, November 15, 2005, 2:54:27 PM, you wrote:
> I want to start using a framework to my future sites and I saw that
> there are quite alot of options out there at the net, if anyone got
> any experience with frameworks I would really like to receive some
> suggestions, recommenditions and even ideas.
> The framework need to achieve the following goals (Doesn't have to
> be all of them):
I'll add a criteria to your list (which nearly all the frameworks out
there lack) - *DOCUMENTATION*
There are so many recent PHP apps out there in the wild (not just
frameworks) that have virtually no real, solid, *useful* documentation
for them. The vast majority of PEAR components suffer from this, lots
of the frameworks have virtually no good documentation at all, some of
the blog apps, the wiki apps, etc etc etc. Stick your finger anywhere
in the PHP pie and you'll hit a cherry, but more often than not have
no help at all on how to consume it, without ripping the thing apart.
I'm sure this isn't unique to PHP, but it gets my goat :) We've got
security consortiums, framework groups, component repositories, class
files a go-go - maybe it was time someone started a PHP Documentation
Group!
Err, apologies for diversifying from your original thread a bit.
Cheers,
Rich
--
Zend Certified Engineer
PHP Development Services
http://www.corephp.co.uk
attached mail follows:
Richard Davey wrote:
> Hi Yonatan,
>
> Tuesday, November 15, 2005, 2:54:27 PM, you wrote:
>
>
>>I want to start using a framework to my future sites and I saw that
>>there are quite alot of options out there at the net, if anyone got
>>any experience with frameworks I would really like to receive some
>>suggestions, recommenditions and even ideas.
>
>
>>The framework need to achieve the following goals (Doesn't have to
>>be all of them):
>
>
> I'll add a criteria to your list (which nearly all the frameworks out
> there lack) - *DOCUMENTATION*
>
> There are so many recent PHP apps out there in the wild (not just
> frameworks) that have virtually no real, solid, *useful* documentation
> for them. The vast majority of PEAR components suffer from this, lots
> of the frameworks have virtually no good documentation at all, some of
> the blog apps, the wiki apps, etc etc etc. Stick your finger anywhere
> in the PHP pie and you'll hit a cherry, but more often than not have
> no help at all on how to consume it, without ripping the thing apart.
>
> I'm sure this isn't unique to PHP, but it gets my goat :) We've got
> security consortiums, framework groups, component repositories, class
> files a go-go - maybe it was time someone started a PHP Documentation
> Group!
>
> Err, apologies for diversifying from your original thread a bit.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Rich
Don't be sorry it's actually a good criteria :)
attached mail follows:
On Tue, 2005-11-15 at 09:54, Yonatan Ben-Nes wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I want to start using a framework to my future sites and I saw that
> there are quite alot of options out there at the net, if anyone got any
> experience with frameworks I would really like to receive some
> suggestions, recommenditions and even ideas.
>
> The framework need to achieve the following goals (Doesn't have to be
> all of them):
> 1. Reusability of codes as components.
> 2. OO.
> 3. PHP 5.
> 4. Code & logic should be seperated from design (MVC and such..).
> 5. Easy to use & learn.
> 6. Extreme flexibility to handle also special requirements.
> 7. Easy usage of PEAR.
> 8. Should have a good living community. (I don't want to choose a
> project which will fall in a year...)
> 5. InterJinn - http://www.interjinn.com/about/index.phtml
Since I'm the InterJinn guy :) I'll comment on your list of reqs...
1. Re-usability is more a symptom of the developer, but InterJinn
does generally provide a nice design for creating small chunks
of highly re-usable and adaptble code.
2. InterJinn is 99% OO except for a few functions that are used
mostly by the framework itself. A list of all services,
components, classes, and functions can be viewed here.
http://www.interjinn.com/jinnDoc/index.phtml
Unfortunately as mentioned by Richard Davey older stuff isn't
well documented as far as the API goes, although there's plenty
of documentation about services in general.
3. InterJinn was NOT written to exploit PHP5 in particular, however
it has been updated to be cleanly compatible (though I haven't
checked with the most recent version of PHP5). That said such
updates are usually fairly trivial due to it's clean nature :)
4. Modules are comprised of components, components implement the
MVC paradigm. The template engine was specifically designed with
said modules/components for easy interfacing with the data. Unlike
Smarty, the code never touches templates, but rather makes data
available, that a template may or may not use. Modules and
components are imported/bound by templates, not the other way
around.
5. InterJinn is not particularly easy to learn, but once you do it
is easy to use -- although your mileage may vary since a lot of
the "easy to use" people out there are cut and paste goons.
6. Very flexible with highly modular and customizable service/modules.
Services are akin to cross application libraries which are
registered in the project configuration. This makes it possible to
share often used code across the application, with the exception
that since the service is requested by registered name it is easy
to drop in functionally different (yet API equivalent) replacements.
To date I've patched in support for InterJinn into existing legacy
web applications and in some cases into existing dirty frameworks
like the eZ framework system with no problem. In these cases
InterJinn is treated like a drop in super library.
7. PEAR is a library of it's own, there's no reason why it couldn't be
easily used anywhere. InterJinn especially makes consideration for
other libraries by having an extremely small footprint in the
globals names space. Additionally classes and functions are named
such that they generally don't conflict. With respect to PEAR
interJinn also provides a wrapper for the PEAR:DB API for it's
own database service which can act as a drop in replacement.
http://www.interjinn.com/jinnDoc/interjinn.service.PearDbManager.phtml
8. InterJinn does NOT have a good community *lol*. But it's not about
to fail since I'm using it actively with several clients and for
my own projects. Although I must say, releases are slow, but then
I usually use the most up to date snapshots since I know they are
more stable than the last release version, as well as having many
more undocumented features. Either way if you decide to try it out
more I'm always available to answer questions. Feel free to email
me directly.
The Future...
While the API documentation sucks for most of the existing code, future
service/components/whatever will be documented nicely. For instance I
recently found myself working with a lot of XML feeds and so I knocked
up my own SimpleXML service to simplify the tedium of working with XML.
This illustrates how future code (and slowly but surely older code) will
be documented:
http://www.interjinn.com/jinnDoc/interjinn.service.JinnSimpleXml.phtml
You can click on the "Implemented via Class JinnSimpleXml" for full
class API documentation (or click the following:)
http://www.interjinn.com/jinnDoc/interjinn.class.JinnSimpleXml.phtml
Currently I am working towards adding a convenient Javascript
integration system that will allow to include javascript modules via a
system similar to including InterJinn services. This will have full
XmlHttpRequest support (Ajax if you must *puke*). You can view details
of the HttpRequest service here:
http://www.interjinn.com/jinnDoc/interjinn.class.JinnHttpRequestService.phtml
Anyways let me know if I can help you more.
Cheers,
Rob.
--
.------------------------------------------------------------.
| InterJinn Application Framework - http://www.interjinn.com |
:------------------------------------------------------------:
| An application and templating framework for PHP. Boasting |
| a powerful, scalable system for accessing system services |
| such as forms, properties, sessions, and caches. InterJinn |
| also provides an extremely flexible architecture for |
| creating re-usable components quickly and easily. |
`------------------------------------------------------------'
attached mail follows:
Robert Cummings wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-11-15 at 09:54, Yonatan Ben-Nes wrote:
>
>>Hi All,
>>
>>I want to start using a framework to my future sites and I saw that
>>there are quite alot of options out there at the net, if anyone got any
>>experience with frameworks I would really like to receive some
>>suggestions, recommenditions and even ideas.
>>
>>The framework need to achieve the following goals (Doesn't have to be
>>all of them):
>>1. Reusability of codes as components.
>>2. OO.
>>3. PHP 5.
>>4. Code & logic should be seperated from design (MVC and such..).
>>5. Easy to use & learn.
>>6. Extreme flexibility to handle also special requirements.
>>7. Easy usage of PEAR.
>>8. Should have a good living community. (I don't want to choose a
>>project which will fall in a year...)
>
>
>>5. InterJinn - http://www.interjinn.com/about/index.phtml
>
>
> Since I'm the InterJinn guy :) I'll comment on your list of reqs...
>
> 1. Re-usability is more a symptom of the developer, but InterJinn
> does generally provide a nice design for creating small chunks
> of highly re-usable and adaptble code.
>
> 2. InterJinn is 99% OO except for a few functions that are used
> mostly by the framework itself. A list of all services,
> components, classes, and functions can be viewed here.
>
> http://www.interjinn.com/jinnDoc/index.phtml
>
> Unfortunately as mentioned by Richard Davey older stuff isn't
> well documented as far as the API goes, although there's plenty
> of documentation about services in general.
>
> 3. InterJinn was NOT written to exploit PHP5 in particular, however
> it has been updated to be cleanly compatible (though I haven't
> checked with the most recent version of PHP5). That said such
> updates are usually fairly trivial due to it's clean nature :)
>
> 4. Modules are comprised of components, components implement the
> MVC paradigm. The template engine was specifically designed with
> said modules/components for easy interfacing with the data. Unlike
> Smarty, the code never touches templates, but rather makes data
> available, that a template may or may not use. Modules and
> components are imported/bound by templates, not the other way
> around.
>
> 5. InterJinn is not particularly easy to learn, but once you do it
> is easy to use -- although your mileage may vary since a lot of
> the "easy to use" people out there are cut and paste goons.
>
> 6. Very flexible with highly modular and customizable service/modules.
> Services are akin to cross application libraries which are
> registered in the project configuration. This makes it possible to
> share often used code across the application, with the exception
> that since the service is requested by registered name it is easy
> to drop in functionally different (yet API equivalent) replacements.
> To date I've patched in support for InterJinn into existing legacy
> web applications and in some cases into existing dirty frameworks
> like the eZ framework system with no problem. In these cases
> InterJinn is treated like a drop in super library.
>
> 7. PEAR is a library of it's own, there's no reason why it couldn't be
> easily used anywhere. InterJinn especially makes consideration for
> other libraries by having an extremely small footprint in the
> globals names space. Additionally classes and functions are named
> such that they generally don't conflict. With respect to PEAR
> interJinn also provides a wrapper for the PEAR:DB API for it's
> own database service which can act as a drop in replacement.
>
>
> http://www.interjinn.com/jinnDoc/interjinn.service.PearDbManager.phtml
>
> 8. InterJinn does NOT have a good community *lol*. But it's not about
> to fail since I'm using it actively with several clients and for
> my own projects. Although I must say, releases are slow, but then
> I usually use the most up to date snapshots since I know they are
> more stable than the last release version, as well as having many
> more undocumented features. Either way if you decide to try it out
> more I'm always available to answer questions. Feel free to email
> me directly.
>
> The Future...
>
> While the API documentation sucks for most of the existing code, future
> service/components/whatever will be documented nicely. For instance I
> recently found myself working with a lot of XML feeds and so I knocked
> up my own SimpleXML service to simplify the tedium of working with XML.
> This illustrates how future code (and slowly but surely older code) will
> be documented:
>
>
> http://www.interjinn.com/jinnDoc/interjinn.service.JinnSimpleXml.phtml
>
> You can click on the "Implemented via Class JinnSimpleXml" for full
> class API documentation (or click the following:)
>
> http://www.interjinn.com/jinnDoc/interjinn.class.JinnSimpleXml.phtml
>
> Currently I am working towards adding a convenient Javascript
> integration system that will allow to include javascript modules via a
> system similar to including InterJinn services. This will have full
> XmlHttpRequest support (Ajax if you must *puke*). You can view details
> of the HttpRequest service here:
>
>
> http://www.interjinn.com/jinnDoc/interjinn.class.JinnHttpRequestService.phtml
>
> Anyways let me know if I can help you more.
>
> Cheers,
> Rob.
Well I got to admit that it sounds (and look :)) promising, I'll check
it out again and probably bug you alittle :P
attached mail follows:
On Tuesday 15 November 2005 16:09, Richard Davey wrote:
> > I want to start using a framework to my future sites and I saw that
> > there are quite alot of options out there at the net, if anyone got
> > any experience with frameworks I would really like to receive some
> > suggestions, recommenditions and even ideas.
>
> I'll add a criteria to your list (which nearly all the frameworks out
> there lack) - *DOCUMENTATION*
>
> There are so many recent PHP apps out there in the wild (not just
> frameworks) that have virtually no real, solid, *useful* documentation
> for them.
Please, take a look on ZNF before saying that ;). One of the first goal of
this framework is to have a very understandable documentation. Is one hundred
of pages and contains, among other things, lot of UML diagrams.
http://znf.zeronotice.com
Best regards.
--
Alessandro 'Aronnax' Rossini
----------------------------
web -> www.aronnax.it
e-mail -> aronnaxopenlug.org
icq -> 2442698
ZeroNotice IT Solutions -> www.zeronotice.com
attached mail follows:
Hi All,
I know that it is pretty darn impossible to come up with a regular
expression for validating emails.
How do you all validated emails on form submission?
Is it good just to do something like "/.+.+[.].+/" ? That (or a
close derivative) should match that there is at least a and a . with
chars before and after each. I will be sending an email to each new
registration with a confirmation link.
Does that regex make about the best sense?
Thanks and 73,
--
Leonard Burton, N9URK
leonardburtongmail.com
"The prolonged evacuation would have dramatically affected the
survivability of the occupants."
attached mail follows:
On Tue, 15 Nov 2005, Leonard Burton wrote:
> I know that it is pretty darn impossible to come up with a regular
> expression for validating emails.
Nah.. just depends on how closely you want to follow the RFC.
http://www.ex-parrot.com/~pdw/Mail-RFC822-Address.html
--
Greg Donald
Zend Certified Engineer
MySQL Core Certification
http://destiney.com/
attached mail follows:
Leonard Burton wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I know that it is pretty darn impossible to come up with a regular
> expression for validating emails.
>
> How do you all validated emails on form submission?
>
> Is it good just to do something like "/.+.+[.].+/" ? That (or a
> close derivative) should match that there is at least a and a . with
> chars before and after each. I will be sending an email to each new
> registration with a confirmation link.
>
> Does that regex make about the best sense?
Try this, (# is the regex delimiter):
#^([\w.+-]+)(([\da-z-]+\.)+[\da-z]{2,4})$#i
--
Richard Heyes
http://www.phpguru.org
attached mail follows:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Leonard Burton" <leonardburtongmail.com>
To: "PHP-General" <php-generallists.php.net>
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2005 4:16 PM
Subject: [PHP] Validating Email addrs
>Hi All,
>I know that it is pretty darn impossible to come up with a regular
>expression for validating emails.
>How do you all validated emails on form submission?
There's a good article on validating e mails here: http://tinyurl.com/9k5jh
Cheers
Matt
attached mail follows:
Hi Greg, all,
> http://www.ex-parrot.com/~pdw/Mail-RFC822-Address.html
That is a heck of a regex there. I am going to have to experiment with
that one a little bit.
Thanks for the replies to my post here.
--
Leonard Burton, N9URK
leonardburtongmail.com
"The prolonged evacuation would have dramatically affected the
survivability of the occupants."
attached mail follows:
Hi All,
Is there any way to develop a php scrip which generates reports of emails sent from a list?
Basic records like open rate, click rate, opt out that is automatically generated from the email campaign list?
I am trying to substitute our email publishing house because they don't have a good system to display Opt outs.
I am open to suggestion and partnership in this project.
If anyone has good email publishing house ( i.e. Takes our Opt-In Email list, sends our designed emails & provides us the stats) or wants to reference, please feel free to do so.
Thanks,
C
attached mail follows:
I am trying to learn how to work with arrays, and have the basic concept
down for working within a single page, but I am having trouble sending an
array from one page to another. For example, I can send a variable from
page to page using either the URL, such as www.domain.com/?foo=bar, or using
a form, but can I send an array from one page to another using a form so
that all the values in the array will be sent? Such as:
Page 1:
----------------------------------------------------------
echo "
<FORM METHOD=POST ACTION=ProcessArray.php>
<INPUT TYPE=TEXT NAME=$TestVariable[1] VALUE=><BR>
<INPUT TYPE=TEXT NAME=$TestVariable[2] VALUE=><BR>
<INPUT TYPE=TEXT NAME=$TestVariable[3] VALUE=><BR>
<INPUT TYPE=SUBMIT VALUE=SUBMIT>
</FORM>
";
Page 2: (ProcessArray.php)
----------------------------------------------------------
for ($i=1;$i<=3;$i++) {
echo "
$TestVariable[$i]<BR>
";
}
Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.
attached mail follows:
On Nov 15, 2005, at 12:07 PM, Ben Miller wrote:
> I am trying to learn how to work with arrays, and have the basic
> concept
> down for working within a single page, but I am having trouble
> sending an
> array from one page to another. For example, I can send a variable
> from
> page to page using either the URL, such as www.domain.com/?foo=bar,
> or using
> a form, but can I send an array from one page to another using a
> form so
> that all the values in the array will be sent? Such as:
The easy way to do this is with sessions; be it strings, numbers,
arrays, whatever.
<?php
session_start();
$_SESSION['myarray']['one'] = 1;
$_SESSION['myarray']['two'] = 2;
$_SESSION['myarray']['three'] = 3;
$_SESSION['myarray']['four'] = 4;
$_SESSION['myarray']['five'] = 5;
// Now you have array $_SESSION['myarray'] with your values in it
?>
And then any page with session_start() should load all the values
stored in $_SESSION on subsequent pages. Much easier than messing
around with forms and submitting from page to page. Since $_SESSION
itself is an array, you can load it up with anything you want -
strings, numbers, other arrays, other nested arrays, etc.
<?php
$_SESSION['blah'] = 'foo';
$_SESSION['count'] = 5;
$_SESSION['myarray']['five']++; // five is now 6
?>
-dan
--
To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that
we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only
unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American
public. -Theodore Roosevelt, 1918
attached mail follows:
Real simple question....
How do I change this from disabled to enabled.
Thanks
Brad
attached mail follows:
[snip]
Real simple question....
How do I change this from disabled to enabled.
[/snip]
Flip the switch?
/subtle :)
This an IIS question. Please see
http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/en/server/iis/default.asp?url=/windows2
000/en/server/iis/htm/core/iicodirv.htm
attached mail follows:
I think I may be headed down the wring direction.
I'm using Apache.
What I'd like to be able to do is to
pass arguments to a script as though it were a directory.
Something like so
http://server.com/script.php/some-virtual/dirs/
On 11/15/05, Jay Blanchard <jay.blanchardthermon.com> wrote:
> [snip]
> Real simple question....
> How do I change this from disabled to enabled.
> [/snip]
>
> Flip the switch?
>
>
> /subtle :)
>
> This an IIS question. Please see
> http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/en/server/iis/default.asp?url=/windows2
> 000/en/server/iis/htm/core/iicodirv.htm
>
attached mail follows:
[snip]
I think I may be headed down the wring direction.
I'm using Apache.
What I'd like to be able to do is to
pass arguments to a script as though it were a directory.
Something like so
http://server.com/script.php/some-virtual/dirs/
[/snip]
http://us2.php.net/dir
http://httpd.apache.org/docs/1.3/mod/mod_rewrite.html
attached mail follows:
Jay Blanchard wrote:
> [snip]
> I think I may be headed down the wring direction.
> I'm using Apache.
> What I'd like to be able to do is to
> pass arguments to a script as though it were a directory.
>
> Something like so
> http://server.com/script.php/some-virtual/dirs/
> [/snip]
>
> http://us2.php.net/dir
>
> http://httpd.apache.org/docs/1.3/mod/mod_rewrite.html
>
Ah, both those links are useless for what he wants to do.
Brad, Make a script called script.php containing the following line:
<pre><?php print_r( $_SERVER['PATH_INFO'] ); ?></pre>
And then access http://yourserver.com/script.php/some/path/info and
you'll see how you can use that string (hint: explode on '/').
Jasper
attached mail follows:
On Tue, Nov 15, 2005 at 02:50:53PM -0500, Brad Glonka wrote:
> I think I may be headed down the wring direction.
Yeah, the Virtual Directory Support isn't really what its name
seems to be, it basically is enabled when php is compiled with
Zend Thread Saftey which only effects how certain things behave
and is rather transparent to any php coder.
> I'm using Apache.
> What I'd like to be able to do is to
> pass arguments to a script as though it were a directory.
>
> Something like so
> http://server.com/script.php/some-virtual/dirs/
You should be able to do that right now. You will see that
the $_SERVER['PATH_INFO'] exists and has '/some-virtual/dirs/' in
it now.
Curt.
--
attached mail follows:
Brad Glonka wrote:
> The script does not give me any output.
> I think this is what I need to enable.
No, as has already been said on the list. That "virtual directory"
setting has nothing to do with this AFAIK.
Are you running PHP as an Apache module or as CGI?
Jasper
attached mail follows:
The script does not give me any output.
I think this is what I need to enable.
On 11/15/05, Jasper Bryant-Greene <jasperalbum.co.nz> wrote:
> Jay Blanchard wrote:
> > [snip]
> > I think I may be headed down the wring direction.
> > I'm using Apache.
> > What I'd like to be able to do is to
> > pass arguments to a script as though it were a directory.
> >
> > Something like so
> > http://server.com/script.php/some-virtual/dirs/
> > [/snip]
> >
> > http://us2.php.net/dir
> >
> > http://httpd.apache.org/docs/1.3/mod/mod_rewrite.html
> >
>
> Ah, both those links are useless for what he wants to do.
>
> Brad, Make a script called script.php containing the following line:
>
> <pre><?php print_r( $_SERVER['PATH_INFO'] ); ?></pre>
>
> And then access http://yourserver.com/script.php/some/path/info and
> you'll see how you can use that string (hint: explode on '/').
>
> Jasper
>
attached mail follows:
When I test locally I get a weird error..
CGI Error
The specified CGI application misbehaved by not returning a complete set of
HTTP headers. The headers it did return are:
any ideas?
R.
attached mail follows:
[snip]
When I test locally I get a weird error..
CGI Error
The specified CGI application misbehaved by not returning a complete set of
HTTP headers. The headers it did return are:
any ideas?
[/snip]
It is not nearly as weird as you may think. Have you looked at your error
log? Can we see the script? Have you Googled?
attached mail follows:
Hi, i磎 writting a php program that parses and saves some xml files on a
server. The problem is that i want to catch warnings so as to be able to
store them in a variable, but not to be put directly on client磗
browser. I got the following code, but i cannot get it working:
//--------------------------------------------------------
$old_track = ini_set('track_errors', '1');
if (!somefunction()) {
echo $php_errormsg, "\n";
}
ini_set('track_errors', $old_track);
//--------------------------------------------------------
When i execute the cgi, the $php_errormsg variable is always empty, even
when there are errors.
Any ideas?
Thanks in advance,
Mariano Guadagnini
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.13.1/169 - Release Date: 15/11/2005
attached mail follows:
Hi,
I'm trying to compile php 4.4.1 on Solaris 8 but I'm getting the error
"Command failed for target 'ext/xml/xml.lo'" during the make process.
[snip]
/nfs/dm11-fs22/work/training/dj365/php-4.4.1/ext/xml/xml.c:1582:
`XML_Char' undeclared (first use in this function)
/nfs/dm11-fs22/work/training/dj365/php-4.4.1/ext/xml/xml.c:1582:
`encoded' undeclared (first use in this function)
/nfs/dm11-fs22/work/training/dj365/php-4.4.1/ext/xml/xml.c: In function
`zif_utf8_decode':
/nfs/dm11-fs22/work/training/dj365/php-4.4.1/ext/xml/xml.c:1602:
`XML_Char' undeclared (first use in this function)
/nfs/dm11-fs22/work/training/dj365/php-4.4.1/ext/xml/xml.c:1602:
`decoded' undeclared (first use in this function)
*** Error code 1
make: Fatal error: Command failed for target 'ext/xml/xml.lo'
If I look in the 'ext/xml/' folder, there's no file called 'xml.lo'.
What can be the problem here?
I used the following configuration with gcc 3.2.3:
configure --prefix=/work/training/dg432/servsoft/php4
--with-apxs2=/work/training/dg432/servsoft/apache2/bin/apxs
--with-mysql=/work/training/dg432/servsoft/mysql4 --enable-calendar
--enable-ftp --with-gettext --with-iconv
--with-dom=/work/training/dg432/servsoft
--with-dom-xslt=/work/training/dg432/servsoft
--with-gd=/work/training/dg432/servsoft
--with-freetype-dir=/work/training/dg432/servsoft
--with-jpeg-dir=/work/training/dg432/servsoft
--with-png-dir=/work/training/dg432/servsoft
--with-zlib-dir=/work/training/dg432/servsoft --enable-gd-native-ttf
Except for gettext and iconv I manually compiled all packaged myself.
In addition to this, I got two warnings during the configuration process:
"configure: warning: You will need bison 1.28" and "configure: warning:
You will need bison 1.28 if you want to regenerate the Zend parser
(found 1.27)"
Could this have anything to do with it?
I hope you can help me out on this one.
Yours,
Age Bosma
attached mail follows:
Hi All,
Does anyone know of a regex to work for Amateur Radio Callsigns that
will work with any from across the world?
Thanks and 73,
--
Leonard Burton, N9URK
leonardburtongmail.com
"The prolonged evacuation would have dramatically affected the
survivability of the occupants."
attached mail follows:
Hi!
I have a server written in C++ and my webpages are in PHP. The PHP has
to communicate with the server using shared memory. This was working
fine on the server running FC-1 with php-4.3.8. We recently migrated
to CentOS 4.1 (Equivalent to RHEL 4.1) running php-4.3.9. The error it
displays is as follows:
shmop_open(): unable to attach or create shared memory segment in
/var/www/html/sharedmem.php on line 2
The server opens the shm in 666 (originally was 644) even then it was
not working. I can see the shared mem open using 'ipcs' command.
The source code of PHP is as follows:
<?php
/*Sem Key is read from this file*/
$SEMROUTE = "/var/www/html/sharedmem/";
$filename = $SEMROUTE."id";
$handle = fopen($filename, "r");
$contents = fread($handle, filesize($filename));
fclose($handle);
$contents = chop($contents);
$shm_key = $contents;
/*DEBUG:: The Contents of the file*/
print $shm_key."<br>"; // These are fine
# print $shm_key;
$shm_id = shmop_open($shm_key, "a",0,0) or die("FATAL ERROR:: Unable
to Access Shared Memory");
/*$shm_size = shmop_size($shm_id);
DEBUG:: print ("Shared Memory Block Size: " . $shm_size."\n");
*/
// Now lets read the string back
$data = shmop_read($shm_id, 0, $shm_size);
if (!$data) {
echo "FATAL ERROR:: Couldn't read from shared memory\n";
exit;
}
?>
The PHPInfo of the servers are as follows (if it will help):
----------------- Server where its working fine ---------
-- Start --
'./configure' '--host=i386-redhat-linux' '--build=i386-redhat-linux'
'--target=i386-redhat-linux-gnu' '--program-prefix=' '--prefix=/usr'
'--exec-prefix=/usr' '--bindir=/usr/bin' '--sbindir=/usr/sbin'
'--sysconfdir=/etc' '--datadir=/usr/share' '--includedir=/usr/include'
'--libdir=/usr/lib' '--libexecdir=/usr/libexec' '--localstatedir=/var'
'--sharedstatedir=/usr/com' '--mandir=/usr/share/man'
'--infodir=/usr/share/info' '--cache-file=../config.cache'
'--with-config-file-path=/etc'
'--with-config-file-scan-dir=/etc/php.d' '--enable-force-cgi-redirect'
'--disable-debug' '--enable-pic' '--disable-rpath'
'--enable-inline-optimization' '--with-bz2' '--with-db4=/usr'
'--with-curl' '--with-exec-dir=/usr/bin' '--with-freetype-dir=/usr'
'--with-png-dir=/usr' '--with-gd' '--enable-gd-native-ttf'
'--without-gdbm' '--with-gettext' '--with-ncurses' '--with-gmp'
'--with-iconv' '--with-jpeg-dir=/usr' '--with-openssl' '--with-png'
'--with-pspell' '--with-regex=system' '--with-xml'
'--with-expat-dir=/usr' '--with-dom=shared,/usr'
'--with-dom-xslt=/usr' '--with-dom-exslt=/usr' '--with-xmlrpc=shared'
'--with-pcre-regex=/usr' '--with-zlib' '--with-layout=GNU'
'--enable-bcmath' '--enable-exif' '--enable-ftp'
'--enable-magic-quotes' '--enable-safe-mode' '--enable-sockets'
'--enable-sysvsem' '--enable-sysvshm' '--enable-discard-path'
'--enable-track-vars' '--enable-trans-sid' '--enable-yp'
'--enable-wddx' '--without-oci8' '--with-pear=/usr/share/pear'
'--with-imap=shared' '--with-imap-ssl' '--with-kerberos'
'--with-ldap=shared' '--with-mysql=shared,/usr' '--with-pgsql=shared'
'--with-snmp=shared,/usr' '--with-snmp=shared'
'--enable-ucd-snmp-hack' '--with-unixODBC=shared'
'--enable-memory-limit' '--enable-bcmath' '--enable-shmop'
'--enable-calendar' '--enable-dbx' '--enable-dio' '--enable-mcal'
'--enable-mbstring=shared' '--enable-mbstr-enc-trans'
'--enable-mbregex' '--with-apxs2=/usr/sbin/apxs'
-- End --
----------------- Config of Server on which it Fails ---------
-- Start --
'./configure' '--build=i686-redhat-linux-gnu'
'--host=i686-redhat-linux-gnu' '--target=i386-redhat-linux-gnu'
'--program-prefix=' '--prefix=/usr' '--exec-prefix=/usr'
'--bindir=/usr/bin' '--sbindir=/usr/sbin' '--sysconfdir=/etc'
'--datadir=/usr/share' '--includedir=/usr/include' '--libdir=/usr/lib'
'--libexecdir=/usr/libexec' '--localstatedir=/var'
'--sharedstatedir=/usr/com' '--mandir=/usr/share/man'
'--infodir=/usr/share/info' '--cache-file=../config.cache'
'--with-config-file-path=/etc'
'--with-config-file-scan-dir=/etc/php.d' '--enable-force-cgi-redirect'
'--disable-debug' '--enable-pic' '--disable-rpath'
'--enable-inline-optimization' '--with-bz2' '--with-db4=/usr'
'--with-curl' '--with-exec-dir=/usr/bin' '--with-freetype-dir=/usr'
'--with-png-dir=/usr' '--with-gd=shared' '--enable-gd-native-ttf'
'--without-gdbm' '--with-gettext' '--with-ncurses=shared' '--with-gmp'
'--with-iconv' '--with-jpeg-dir=/usr' '--with-openssl' '--with-png'
'--with-pspell' '--with-xml' '--with-expat-dir=/usr'
'--with-dom=shared,/usr' '--with-dom-xslt=/usr'
'--with-dom-exslt=/usr' '--with-xmlrpc=shared'
'--with-pcre-regex=/usr' '--with-zlib' '--with-layout=GNU'
'--enable-bcmath' '--enable-exif' '--enable-ftp'
'--enable-magic-quotes' '--enable-sockets' '--enable-sysvsem'
'--enable-sysvshm' '--enable-track-vars' '--enable-trans-sid'
'--enable-yp' '--enable-wddx' '--with-pear=/usr/share/pear'
'--with-imap=shared' '--with-imap-ssl' '--with-kerberos'
'--with-ldap=shared' '--with-mysql=shared,/usr' '--with-pgsql=shared'
'--with-snmp=shared,/usr' '--with-snmp=shared'
'--enable-ucd-snmp-hack' '--with-unixODBC=shared,/usr'
'--enable-memory-limit' '--enable-shmop' '--enable-calendar'
'--enable-dbx' '--enable-dio' '--enable-mbstring=shared'
'--enable-mbstr-enc-trans' '--enable-mbregex'
'--with-mime-magic=/usr/share/file/magic.mime'
'--with-apxs2=/usr/sbin/apxs'
-- End --
Both the config say that 'shmop' is enabled.
Can some one help me with this, I am in desperate