|
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 27 Sep 2006 08:09:08 -0000 Issue 4370
php-general-digest-help
lists.php.net
Date: Wed Sep 27 2006 - 03:09:08 CDT
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
php-general Digest 27 Sep 2006 08:09:08 -0000 Issue 4370
Topics (messages 242234 through 242272):
Status of PHPDocWriter
242234 by: Leonard Burton
reading a remote directory
242235 by: Jay Blanchard
Re: Override php.ini
242236 by: Beauford
Re: Mail Problem
242237 by: Richard Lynch
242238 by: Richard Lynch
242241 by: Travis Doherty
242254 by: Richard Lynch
242256 by: Richard Lynch
242265 by: Curt Zirzow
242267 by: Curt Zirzow
Re: Mysql_free_result() doubt
242239 by: Richard Lynch
Re: People who bought this also bought (amazon style) functionality...logic problem
242240 by: Richard Lynch
242249 by: Curt Zirzow
Re: manage/modify linux file/folder structure...
242242 by: Richard Lynch
Re: How would you do this ?
242243 by: Richard Lynch
242244 by: Richard Lynch
Re: Print or Echo takes lots of time
242245 by: Richard Lynch
242246 by: Richard Lynch
242257 by: Richard Lynch
242263 by: Curt Zirzow
242266 by: Richard Lynch
242269 by: Robert Cummings
242270 by: Børge Holen
Re: Error Reporting for file commands
242247 by: Richard Lynch
Re: Download files outside DocumentRoot Dir
242248 by: Richard Lynch
242250 by: Richard Lynch
242251 by: Richard Lynch
242262 by: Curt Zirzow
242268 by: Richard Lynch
Re: Alternative to FCKeditor
242252 by: Richard Lynch
Re: Object to array conversion oddity
242253 by: Richard Lynch
242258 by: Marcus Bointon
Display dynamic progress bar
242255 by: Choy, Wai Yew
Re: File Upload Security and chmod
242259 by: Richard Lynch
242264 by: Richard Lynch
Re: libcurl (cookies across cURL session). . .?
242260 by: Richard Lynch
Re: Frustrated trying to get help from your site
242261 by: Richard Lynch
242272 by: David Robley
PHP5, Windoze, Extensions
242271 by: Dave Carrera
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:
Hi All,
Does anyone on this list know the status of PHPDocWriter?
Is it an abandoned project?
--
Leonard Burton, N9URK
leonardburtongmail.com
"The prolonged evacuation would have dramatically affected the
survivability of the occupants."
attached mail follows:
I have to read a directory (on a windows machine) from another box (a
linux machine) and I thought that I could set the handle to the IP
address of the windows box, but that does not work. Do I have to open a
socket or is there another way?
Thanks!
attached mail follows:
I wouldn't use it myself, but a buddy who is using Frontpage is complaining
that it automatically changes <? To <script language....> and wanted to know
how to get around this. I suggested not using FP and get a real editor.
Thanks to others that replied.
B
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Lynch [mailto:ceol-i-e.com]
Sent: September 22, 2006 8:02 PM
To: Beauford
Cc: PHP
Subject: Re: [PHP] Override php.ini
On Fri, September 22, 2006 11:42 am, Beauford wrote:
> Is there a way I can use <% %> instead of <? ?> for the opening and
> closing tags of a php script. I thought I read this somewhere but
> can't find anything on it now.
>
> Is there something that I could do with override php.ini command? I
> don't have access to the php.ini file on this server.
You can do this in .htaccess under Apache, or with ini_set (which would have
to be in <?php ?>
But you SHOULD NOT DO THIS
Nobody else on the planet is using <% for PHP, and it's unlikely to be all
that useful to you.
--
Like Music?
http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm
attached mail follows:
On Tue, September 26, 2006 11:09 am, phpswimwebs.com wrote:
> I have an issue with sending email via PHP which may be a
> configuration problem with either PHP, Apache, or possibly a Sendmail,
> but I don't know which yet. I figured I'd start here first.
>
> Here's the situation. I have several webpages that send email to
> users for various reasons. We have our webserver, an intranet
> webserver, configured to connect to our smtp server which sits on a
> different box. The script looks like this:
>
> <?PHP
> $from = "webmasterswimwebs.com";
> $to = "someemailswimwebs.com";
> $subject = "Test";
> $msg = "This is a test from my site\n\nTimestamp: " . date("r");
> $headers = "From:$from\r\n";
Add a space after the ':' to be kosher.
Add a Reply-To:
Add an Errors-to: (I think?)
> if(!mail($to,$subject,$msg,$headers)) { die("Unable to send"); }
*IF* you are using PHP5 (?) and *IF* your security settings allow it,
the optional fifth argument will let you specify the "real" sender of
the message, which the responder may or may not be using to bounce to.
http://php.net/mail
--
Like Music?
http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm
attached mail follows:
On Tue, September 26, 2006 11:16 am, Kevin Murphy wrote:
> Why not validate the email address before you send. I use something
> like this to kick back an error that says you put in a bad email
> address. It won't tell you about a wrong email address, but it will
> tell you if they forgot to put in the sign and stuff.
>
> if (!preg_match("/^(.+)[a-zA-Z0-9-]+\.[a-zA-Z0-9.-]+$/si", $data))
> { $email_error = "yes"; }
Given that the *correct* PCRE expression for a valid email address is
3 pages long, the odds that yours is not rejecting some valid address
seem rather slim to me.
The . between the 9 and the - is not escaped, and renders the rest of
the characters in that class superfluous.
But let's suppose your PCRE actually proved the email syntactically
valid.
That's got *NOTHING* to do with the email generating a bounce or not!
There are a zillion times as many syntactically valid emails as there
are ones that don't bounce, never mind the even smaller class of email
addresses that actually go somewhere, and the even smaller class of
email addresses that a human reads on a regular basis.
--
Like Music?
http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm
attached mail follows:
Richard Lynch wrote:
>>if(!mail($to,$subject,$msg,$headers)) { die("Unable to send"); }
>>
>>
>
>*IF* you are using PHP5 (?) and *IF* your security settings allow it,
>the optional fifth argument will let you specify the "real" sender of
>the message, which the responder may or may not be using to bounce to.
>
>http://php.net/mail
>
>
Richard is correct on that. The fifth argument isn't only for the
envelope sender, so ensure you include the '-f' for sendmail and compat.
wrappers.
php.net/mail: ChangeLog:
"4.0.5 The additional_parameters parameter was added."
>... which the responder may or may not be using to bounce to.
>
>
They should *always* be sending to the envelope from address (SMTP `MAIL
FROM` command), with an empty envelope sender (SMTP `MAIL FROM:<>`) to
avoid loops.
The RFC's are a rather in depth, so here is an excerpt from Wikipedia
that pretty much sums up what the RFCs do contain:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bounce_message]
> The Return-Path is visible in delivered mail as header field
> Return-Path inserted by the final SMTP mail transfer agent
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mail_transfer_agent> (MTA), also known
> as mail delivery agent
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mail_delivery_agent> (MDA). The MDA
> simply copies the *reverse path* in the SMTP MAIL FROM command into
> the Return-Path. The MDA also removes bogus Return-Path header fields
> inserted by other MTAs, this header field is generally guaranteed to
> reflect the last reverse path seen in the MAIL FROM command.
Travis Doherty
attached mail follows:
On Tue, September 26, 2006 5:08 pm, Travis Doherty wrote:
> They should *always* be sending to the envelope from address (SMTP
> `MAIL
> FROM` command), with an empty envelope sender (SMTP `MAIL FROM:<>`) to
> avoid loops.
There was a brief period in time where there was an Errors-to: header
that some MTAs where using...
I got no idea if they were just ignoring RFCs (Microsoft) or the RFCs
changed or what...
But adding the Errors-to: header may solve things for a tiny
percentage of legacy (broken) MTAs.
YMMV
--
Like Music?
http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm
attached mail follows:
On Tue, September 26, 2006 5:08 pm, Travis Doherty wrote:
> The RFC's are a rather in depth, so here is an excerpt from Wikipedia
> that pretty much sums up what the RFCs do contain:
> [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bounce_message]
For awhile, I've been pondering the advisability of sending a "Bounce"
for some spam -- the ones where I think it's a more or less honorable
company, with some idiots running it, and I want off their list, and
other actions have so far failed.
So, if I code a PHP IMAP app to let me send a "Bounce" for one
message, is that going to screw my because some MTA will cache that
"Bounce" status and start bouncing other mail?...
Yeah, okay, the question is sorta off-topic, but it will get coded in
PHP if it's safe to do so...
--
Like Music?
http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm
attached mail follows:
On 9/26/06, Richard Lynch <ceol-i-e.com> wrote:
> On Tue, September 26, 2006 11:09 am, phpswimwebs.com wrote:
> > I have an issue with sending email via PHP which may be a
> > configuration problem with either PHP, Apache, or possibly a Sendmail,
> > but I don't know which yet. I figured I'd start here first.
> >
> > Here's the situation. I have several webpages that send email to
> > users for various reasons. We have our webserver, an intranet
> > webserver, configured to connect to our smtp server which sits on a
> > different box. The script looks like this:
> >
> > <?PHP
> > $from = "webmasterswimwebs.com";
> > $to = "someemailswimwebs.com";
> > $subject = "Test";
> > $msg = "This is a test from my site\n\nTimestamp: " . date("r");
> > $headers = "From:$from\r\n";
>
> Add a space after the ':' to be kosher.
::cough::rfc compliant::cough::)
>
> Add a Reply-To:
> Add an Errors-to: (I think?)
Yeah these can help in finding out the problem, the Errors-To: header
is usually used when the original message can't be delivered, if the
server handling the message supports it will send to that header
instead of the envelope addressee. The Reply-To, is more for the
client software, iirc.
>
> > if(!mail($to,$subject,$msg,$headers)) { die("Unable to send"); }
>
> *IF* you are using PHP5 (?) and *IF* your security settings allow it,
> the optional fifth argument will let you specify the "real" sender of
> the message, which the responder may or may not be using to bounce to.
php4 allows the '5th' param as well, but the safe_mode paramater does
affect if you are able to use this.
Curt.
attached mail follows:
On a side note.. have i ever mentioned the email system really sucks.
Curt.
attached mail follows:
On Tue, September 26, 2006 8:44 am, suresh kumar wrote:
> I am little bit confused to use the
> mysql_free_result($result) function.because i searched
> google - they told dont use this function to php 4.X
> and also it says clearly "When you are done with a
> result set, you must free the memory it uses by calling
> mysql_free_result()".
>
> I mean something like when to use or not to use it? I
> already know that only SELECT queries that retrieve
> rows require to free resources, but maybe when all data
> is retrieved the resources are free automatically or we
> need to call mysql_free_result() to free the memory. and
> also this function will free only one row at a time or
> all the rows of the result set .
PHP is going to free the data when your script ends, so most common
uses of MySQL don't even need mysql_free_result, as your page doesn't
do anything after it's done with MySQL anyway.
In some scripts, you are "done" with a large result set, and can gain
some performance by releasing all the resources tied to that result
set.
The argument to mysql_free_result is a result resource, and it frees
ALL the records, as you call it, and any other resources that result
set is using.
--
Like Music?
http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm
attached mail follows:
On Tue, September 26, 2006 7:18 am, Ryan A wrote:
> I want to write a "module" for xcart (a commercial
> 'shopping cart') which would be like what Amazon.com
> offers when you go to shop on their site... when you
> click on a product to see its details you get a little
> box below that recommends more products based on what
> others have purchased
>
> eg:
> If you click on a toy helicopter it would recommend
> extra rotor blades,landing gear etc
>
> eg 2:
> If you click on Eminem's latest album it would show
> you his other two albums that people bought with this
> album
>
> etc
>
> I'm trying to work out the logic to do this... and
> quite frankly have hit a brick wall.
Possibly because Amazon's algorithm does not down-scale well...
> So far:
> -------
> I was thinking when someone (Joe) purchases X with
> product id Y I would put that in a seperate table,
> then when someone (Jane) else comes looking at item Y
> I would display everything that Joe bought...
> but then it gets a little complicated, if Jane buys Y
> and other stuff that Joe didnt buy... how do I merge
> what Joe and Jane bought to display to the next
> visitor? (I can only dispaly 5 recommendations at
> once)
You want something like this:
select other_stuff.product_id, count(order_id) as score
from orders as other_stuff, orders as this_product
where other_stuff.order_id = this_product.order_id
and other_stuff.product_id != $product_id
and this_product.product_id = $product_id
group by other_stuff.id
order by sold DESC
limit 5
The point being that you get the 5 things that are MOST purchased in
other orders with this same product.
The above query may well bring your DB to its knees, and you may need
to optimize the heck out of it.
YMMV
> I would appreciate any tips/advise and code you can
> give me, would be fantastic of course if you have
> worked with xcart or have already done this.
The problem is that unless you have the volume of Sales that Amazon
has, there may not be enough people buying enough stuff for this to
make sense.
It also won't group accessories or anything -- It goes solely based on
who bought what.
This is possibly great for "e-commerce" but might not be the ideal.
I *much* prefer the CDBaby approach where somebody listens to the CD
and then recommends artists they think are complementary. :-)
--
Like Music?
http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm
attached mail follows:
On 9/26/06, Richard Lynch <ceol-i-e.com> wrote:
> On Tue, September 26, 2006 7:18 am, Ryan A wrote:
> > I want to write a "module" for xcart (a commercial
> > 'shopping cart') which would be like what Amazon.com
> > offers when you go to shop on their site... when you
> > click on a product to see its details you get a little
> > box below that recommends more products based on what
> > others have purchased
> >
> > eg:
> > If you click on a toy helicopter it would recommend
> > extra rotor blades,landing gear etc
> >
> > eg 2:
> > If you click on Eminem's latest album it would show
> > you his other two albums that people bought with this
> > album
> >
> > etc
> >
> > I'm trying to work out the logic to do this... and
> > quite frankly have hit a brick wall.
>
> Possibly because Amazon's algorithm does not down-scale well...
>
> > So far:
> > -------
> > I was thinking when someone (Joe) purchases X with
> > product id Y I would put that in a seperate table,
> > then when someone (Jane) else comes looking at item Y
> > I would display everything that Joe bought...
> > but then it gets a little complicated, if Jane buys Y
> > and other stuff that Joe didnt buy... how do I merge
> > what Joe and Jane bought to display to the next
> > visitor? (I can only dispaly 5 recommendations at
> > once)
>
> You want something like this:
> select other_stuff.product_id, count(order_id) as score
> from orders as other_stuff, orders as this_product
> where other_stuff.order_id = this_product.order_id
> and other_stuff.product_id != $product_id
> and this_product.product_id = $product_id
> group by other_stuff.id
> order by sold DESC
> limit 5
>
> The point being that you get the 5 things that are MOST purchased in
> other orders with this same product.
>
> The above query may well bring your DB to its knees, and you may need
> to optimize the heck out of it.
Yeah i was just thinking about that as i read it. The one thing I
would do is generate some sort of table on a scheduled bases that
links ids of the items that were bought into a some sort of group. and
then just use that table on the page you are showing.
Curt.
attached mail follows:
On Mon, September 25, 2006 3:59 pm, bruce wrote:
> i should state... while i've seen different apps... i'm more
> interested in
> any that have actually been used by you, or someone you know!!
>
> an app that comes with references!
> Google for php file manager - there are lots of them around, but
> remember that they are 1) a huge security risk, and 2) limited by the
> filesystem permissions of the web server user.
Note that 1) and 2) here are diamtrically opposed.
The more you have of 1), the less you have of 2) and vice versa.
Not knowing which one you want more of, nobody can give you good
advice...
Actually, here's some advice: Don't try to do this in a web app,
because either the Security will suck, or the functionality with suck.
:-)
--
Like Music?
http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm
attached mail follows:
On Mon, September 25, 2006 8:26 am, Jad madi wrote:
> I'm building an RSS aggregator so I'm trying to find out the best way
> to
> parse users account feeds equally so Lets say we have 20.000 user with
> average of 10 feeds in account so we have about
> 200.000 feed
>
> How would you schedule the parsing process to keep all accounts always
> updated without killing the server? NOTE: that some of the 200.000
> feeds
> might be shared between more than one user
Before I spent another microsecond worrying about splitting my
processor time/speed, I'd write a test application with the most plain
and simple straightforward architecture to see if I need to worry
about splitting my processor time/speed. :-)
Just rip through all the feeds and do the job, and stop whining about
it :-) :-) :-)
More seriously, until you *know* you can't do it, or have metrics
showing what you can do, attempting to optimize is just plain silly.
If you *do* need to optimize, K.I.S.S.
Instead of ranking users and all that, just run through X% of each
user's feed, where X is a number you can control through an admin
page.
And maybe round "up" so if X% is 0.0001, you still get at least one
from each feed.
Definitely run this as a daemon or cron job or something similar, that
just keeps ripping through the feeds and starting over.
The overhead of the book-keeping you are thinking about will dwarf the
original problem you are trying to solve, which may not be a problem
anyway.
--
Like Music?
http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm
attached mail follows:
On Tue, September 26, 2006 1:17 am, Chris wrote:
> Cache the feeds for a period of time.
Oh yeah.
I forgot that part.
Here's some code I posted for that a few months back
http://www.l-i-e.com/FeedMulti/FeedMulti.phps
Note that the above opens up multiple feeds at once.
You do *not* want to sit around waiting for dog-slow feed #37 when you
could have your computer reading 10 other feeds while you are waiting.
I'm not sure I'd want to try to open up 100 feeds at once with this,
but you can at least do 10 or even 20 at a time.
--
Like Music?
http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm
attached mail follows:
On Mon, September 25, 2006 7:11 am, Sancar Saran wrote:
> When I was check the performance of my system I found interesting
> resuts.
>
> My code stores html output into a variable. When page creation
> complete I
> printed out the variable.
>
> Problem was generation html code takes 0.5 second and just
> echo $strPage takes 2.0 or more second.
>
> my code structure was.
>
> $strPage = "<html> yada dayda";
> ...
> $strPage.= " another html tags";
> ...
> $strPage.= getSqlDataAndCreateSomeHtmlCOde();
> ...
> end of page creation.
> Current Total execution time 0.5 seconds.
> print $strPage;
> Current Total execution time 2.5 seconds.
>
> $strPage carries entire html structure (for example equal of 100K html
> code);
>
> excluding the cookie and other kind of header transfers and error
> messages,
> there was no print or echo command was submitted.
>
> Is there any idea about this latency and any idea to find problem...
You could try echo-ing it out in "chunks" instead of waiting until the
very end.
echo/print has to send the data "out" through the very narrow pipe to
Apache -> the browser
If you send every little snippet one tiny piece at a time, you waste
resources.
If you wait until the end and send out some huge monster string, you
waste resources.
Find the balance if you can.
Depends on your hardware/bandwidth exactly where optimum is.
--
Like Music?
http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm
attached mail follows:
On Tue, September 26, 2006 12:16 pm, Børge Holen wrote:
> On Tuesday 26 September 2006 02:07, Robert Cummings wrote:
>> On Mon, 2006-09-25 at 17:39 -0600, Google Kreme wrote:
>> > I'm sitting here with 4 Gigs of RAM trying to figure out how to
>> use
>> > it all... :-) (Me, in 2005)
>>
>> Not really related to the post... but I find a good way to eat up 4
>> gigs
>> of RAM is to run several VMWare nodes :) Depending on what these
>> nodes
>> do, it can also be a great way to eat up those dual core processors
>> :)
>
> Forget 'bout em vmware stuff. Imagine putting those ramdisks to good
> use.
I wonder what would happen if you put your swap on a RAM disk?
Wouldn't that be really fast?!
--
Like Music?
http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm
attached mail follows:
On Tue, September 26, 2006 4:08 am, Colin Guthrie wrote:
> Google Kreme wrote:
>> On 25 Sep 2006, at 06:11 , Sancar Saran wrote:
>>> $strPage = "<html> yada dayda";
>>> ...
>>> $strPage.= " another html tags";
>>> ...
>>> $strPage.= getSqlDataAndCreateSomeHtmlCOde();
>>
>> If this is generating hundred of K of HTML, use ' instead of "
>>
>> (yes, it's faster).
>
> In this example tho', it is not the string processing that is taking
> up
> the time. The $ expansion etc. will be done when building the string
> $strPage, not at the echo stage which is where the OP is seeing the
> delay.
Plus it's "faster" in such a marginal sense that you'd have to be
doing zillions in a very tight loop to measure it.
Benchmark it for yourself and see.
--
Like Music?
http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm
attached mail follows:
On 9/26/06, Richard Lynch <ceol-i-e.com> wrote:
> On Tue, September 26, 2006 12:16 pm, Børge Holen wrote:
> > On Tuesday 26 September 2006 02:07, Robert Cummings wrote:
> >> On Mon, 2006-09-25 at 17:39 -0600, Google Kreme wrote:
> >> > I'm sitting here with 4 Gigs of RAM trying to figure out how to
> >> use
> >> > it all... :-) (Me, in 2005)
> >>
> >> Not really related to the post... but I find a good way to eat up 4
> >> gigs
> >> of RAM is to run several VMWare nodes :) Depending on what these
> >> nodes
> >> do, it can also be a great way to eat up those dual core processors
> >> :)
> >
> > Forget 'bout em vmware stuff. Imagine putting those ramdisks to good
> > use.
>
> I wonder what would happen if you put your swap on a RAM disk?
I actually have done this, it works like a charm :)
you just have to ensure swap doesn't run out... of course i'd only
recomend this on a dedicated machine for like firewalling or a
gateway.
Curt
attached mail follows:
On Tue, September 26, 2006 6:35 pm, Curt Zirzow wrote:
>> I wonder what would happen if you put your swap on a RAM disk?
>
> I actually have done this, it works like a charm :)
>
> you just have to ensure swap doesn't run out... of course i'd only
> recomend this on a dedicated machine for like firewalling or a
> gateway.
Like...
Wouldn't it just make more sense to not have swap at all?...
I mean, you can only be increasing overhead and whatnot...
I suppose if you just plain CANNOT build the system with no swap,
because the tools won't let you do that...
Hmmmm. Never tried to build a swap-less box, for obvious reasons...
--
Like Music?
http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm
attached mail follows:
On Tue, 2006-09-26 at 18:46 -0500, Richard Lynch wrote:
> On Tue, September 26, 2006 6:35 pm, Curt Zirzow wrote:
> >> I wonder what would happen if you put your swap on a RAM disk?
> >
> > I actually have done this, it works like a charm :)
> >
> > you just have to ensure swap doesn't run out... of course i'd only
> > recomend this on a dedicated machine for like firewalling or a
> > gateway.
>
> Like...
>
> Wouldn't it just make more sense to not have swap at all?...
>
> I mean, you can only be increasing overhead and whatnot...
>
> I suppose if you just plain CANNOT build the system with no swap,
> because the tools won't let you do that...
>
> Hmmmm. Never tried to build a swap-less box, for obvious reasons...
*lol* I was gonna say, why the hell would anyone make swap into a
ramdisk when the memory used for the ramdisk would be better used as
primary RAM. I presumed you were joking Richard which you clarify above,
but Curtis now has me wondering :B The only time I'd use a ramdisk for
swap is if I had the extra cash to shell out for one of the pretend hard
drives that really map to RAM... like this sucker:
http://www.shoprbc.com/ca/shop/product_details.php?pid=13968
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:
---------- Forwarded Message ----------
Subject: Re: [PHP] Print or Echo takes lots of time
Date: Wednesday 27 September 2006 06:37
From: Børge Holen <borgearivene.net>
To: ceol-i-e.com
On Wednesday 27 September 2006 01:46, Richard Lynch wrote:
> On Tue, September 26, 2006 6:35 pm, Curt Zirzow wrote:
> >> I wonder what would happen if you put your swap on a RAM disk?
> >
> > I actually have done this, it works like a charm :)
> >
> > you just have to ensure swap doesn't run out... of course i'd only
> > recomend this on a dedicated machine for like firewalling or a
> > gateway.
>
> Like...
>
> Wouldn't it just make more sense to not have swap at all?...
>
> I mean, you can only be increasing overhead and whatnot...
>
> I suppose if you just plain CANNOT build the system with no swap,
> because the tools won't let you do that...
>
> Hmmmm. Never tried to build a swap-less box, for obvious reasons...
I've done that since '01.
Never any occurences (witch WILL happen whenever you run out). Of course
never on a production machine, but my desktop and laptop sure got none.
> --
> Like Music?
> http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm
--
---
Børge
Kennel Arivene
http://www.arivene.net
---
-------------------------------------------------------
--
---
Børge
Kennel Arivene
http://www.arivene.net
---
attached mail follows:
Try using http://php.net/set_error_handler and see if you can trap the
errors.
You'll want to test it with a test script that intentionally causes
the errors.
On Mon, September 25, 2006 5:53 am, James Nunnerley wrote:
> Sometime ago, I posted the email below, regarding some problems with a
> file
> manager we have developed for our users.
>
> The problem still exists, and is now starting to cause "complaints".
> Mainly
> from my manager, who's fed-up with receiving the error emails from the
> system, but it must be annoying users!
>
> The scenario is; we have a fairly large Linux cluster, with a RAID
> disc.
> Obviously because of the number of disc calls, there's a fair amount
> of
> caching.
>
> We think the problem is related to this, and would ideally like purely
> to
> suppress the error, as it's normally when the script is trying to
> delete
> something already deleted.
>
> I've tried turning off errors (error_reporting(0)) and indeed using
> on all
> php file system calls, but it still triggers an error.
>
> Does anyone know of any issues with suppressing errors on the
> following
> functions?
> - unlink
> - mkdir
> - copy
> - scandir
>
> All of these fail sporadically, even with the above error stuff turned
> off,
> and trigger an error.
>
> Anyone's thoughts gratefully received....
>
> Thanks
> Nunners
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Nunnerley [mailto:webmasterwebit.co.uk]
> Sent: 25 July 2006 16:33
> To: 'php-generallists.php.net'
> Subject: Error Reporting for file commands
>
> We've created a file manager which allows users to access their web
> space on
> a server. It's working brilliantly, except that it would seem there
> are
> some caching issues, either by the system cache or the web server
> cache that
> are causing us a headache.
>
> When the script tries to delete a file, we always check (using
> file_exists)
> to see whether the file exists before it's deleted.
>
> The check comes back true, but the unlink then fails, saying no file
> or
> directory there!
>
> We've tried turning off all errors (using error_reoprting(0) ) but
> this
> would seem to have little difference in the error - it still comes
> back with
> a failure.
>
> We are using our own error handling, but before the command is carried
> out,
> there is this 0 call...
>
> Does anyone know how we can stop these errors?
>
> Cheers
> Nunners
>
> --
> PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>
--
Like Music?
http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm
attached mail follows:
On Sun, September 24, 2006 11:44 pm, Ramiro wrote:
> i'm trying to find a good solution to this problem. I want download
> files
> from a directory outside DocumentRoot.
>
> This files cannot be downloaded through direct url like
> http://site/test.zip. It must be downloaded after user login.
>
> I know i can do that using some functions like fread() + fopen() or
> readfile(), than i would echo file buffer to browser with correct
> headers.
> But, reading then dumping file to browser is a big problem to server.
>
> I've made one test that shows me i will "eat" 1.8% of RAM (i've used
> "ps
> aux" at Linux, in a server with 2Gb of RAM) to download a 30Mb file at
> 60kb/s speed. So, imagine what a dump-php-script can do with 50 to 100
> concurrently downloads. Probably i will need 1 TeraByte of RAM to
> provide
> downloads ;)
Which did you use?
readfile() or fopen/fread
Because readfile() probably WILL cause that problem.
But fopen/fread with a small buffer will allow many more concurrent
downloads to "share" the RAM, but will also use as much RAM as is
available, if nothing else is going on...
I suspect your test is flawed, in other words. :-)
>
> Theres my question now. Is there other way to protect files against
> direct
> downloading? (Obligating users to login and denying direct-url's).
Well, there's HTTP Authentication.
There's time-specific URLs.
There's all kinds of ways to protect a directory and require login...
> I also know i can check referer by using Mod_Rewrite at Apache. But it
> isn't
> secure, since referer cannot be sent or be fake.
> header('Content-Description: File Transfer');
> header('Content-Type: application/force-download');
> header("Content-Disposition: attachment;
> filename=\"".basename($url)."\";");
Bogus, bogus, bogus.
Please read this rant:
http://richardlynch.blogspot.com/
> header('Content-Length: ' . filesize($url));
> readfile($url) OR die();
Yup, readfile()
That's a big difference right there...
fopen/fread != readfile
--
Like Music?
http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm
attached mail follows:
On Mon, September 25, 2006 7:52 am, Miles Thompson wrote:
> $filenam = $_REQUEST["filenam"];
> if ($filenam){
> $contents = file_get_contents( "../above_root/" .
> $filenam );
> echo $contents;
> }else{
> echo "Not found";
> }
I certainly hope this is not ALL of the script...
Imagine, if you will, that somebody surfs to this URL:
http://example.com/above_script.php?filenam=../../../../../etc/passwd
By the rules of Linux, they've just downloaded your passwd file, which
has all your usernames in it.
That's a Bad Thing, as they then can look for an easy password in
those accounts.
Sanitize your data!
PS Not to mention that file_get_contents() will suck the ENTIRE 60Mb
file into RAM, which is exactly what the OP needs to avoid... :-)
--
Like Music?
http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm
attached mail follows:
On Mon, September 25, 2006 3:57 pm, Christopher Weldon wrote:
> On 2:36 pm 09/25/06 "Ramiro Cavalcanti" <ramirohostcom.com.br> wrote:
>> Hi Christopher,
>> at first, thank you for your answer.
>>
>> I'd like to know if it's possible use this when php is running like
>> cgi (php-suexec). I've put this code at httpd.conf at <module php>,
>> then tryed to use it at .htaccess, but without successs.
>>
>> Thank you again.
>>
>
> Oh, in that case, you most definitely can't use the .htaccess
> conditions.
> PHP will have issues if you are running php-suexec.
>
> I'll see if I can think of any other ways around this, but php-suexec
> definitely limits your usage for this simple fix right now.
If you *want* that ugly HTTP Auth popup box, you can search on php.net
for code to do that.
If not, you can take that code, and replace the HTTP challenge with a
simple login form.
If they aren't logged in, the download just doesn't go...
--
Like Music?
http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm
attached mail follows:
On 9/24/06, Ramiro <ramirohostcom.com.br> wrote:
> Hi,
> i'm trying to find a good solution to this problem. I want download files
> from a directory outside DocumentRoot.
This is a standard procedure.
>
> This files cannot be downloaded through direct url like
> http://site/test.zip. It must be downloaded after user login.
This will need some sort of rewrite or 404 handling on the webserver level
>
> I know i can do that using some functions like fread() + fopen() or
> readfile(), than i would echo file buffer to browser with correct headers.
> But, reading then dumping file to browser is a big problem to server.
I readfile() about 10 6mb files per-second, and havn't had any issues
with performance.
>
> I've made one test that shows me i will "eat" 1.8% of RAM (i've used "ps
> aux" at Linux, in a server with 2Gb of RAM) to download a 30Mb file at
> 60kb/s speed. So, imagine what a dump-php-script can do with 50 to 100
> concurrently downloads. Probably i will need 1 TeraByte of RAM to provide
> downloads ;)
Provide your tests, and exactly what version of php you have. a read
file or a fopen/fread wont uses that much memory unless you dont
specifly a length or specify a rather large amount for the length
param for fread()
>
> Theres my question now. Is there other way to protect files against direct
> downloading? (Obligating users to login and denying direct-url's).
Yes.
>
> I also know i can check referer by using Mod_Rewrite at Apache. But it isn't
> secure, since referer cannot be sent or be fake.
you can check it without mod_rewrite.
I think you meant to say 'it isn't secure, since the referrer can be
fake or not even sent'
So yes, this is true, this is not a security mechanism.
Curt.
attached mail follows:
On Tue, September 26, 2006 6:29 pm, Curt Zirzow wrote:
>> This files cannot be downloaded through direct url like
>> http://site/test.zip. It must be downloaded after user login.
>
> This will need some sort of rewrite or 404 handling on the webserver
> level
Au contraire, my good friend.
$_SERVER['PATH_INFO'] and judicious usage of ForceType is much simpler
and less stressful than mod_rewrite and 404 handling :-)
I used mod_rewrite exactly once. Man, that was painful...
--
Like Music?
http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm
attached mail follows:
On Mon, September 25, 2006 1:17 am, Lester Caine wrote:
>> TinyMCE...I don't know how good/bad TinyMCE is, but if you can't use
>> FCK, you could try it.
>>
>> http://tinymce.moxiecode.com/
>
> Looks like we are all looking for something that actually works :(
> I switched TinyMCE off because it keeps messing up good html, and I've
> been told to try FCKeditor ;)
Train your users to use the handful of tags that they actually need?
And use CSS to style those tags so that they only need super simple
tags in the first place?
Obviously this only works for educable userbase, so if your
client/admin/author/editor is not educable, you're screwed.
Note that the general case of having the whole wide world able to edit
in FCK or TinyMCE is probably flawed from a security stand-point,
never mind the educable issues...
Though, I confess, I still have one site completely wide open to
anybody to trash all the content if they so desire. [shrug] It's been
there for years, and nobody seems to dis it enough to want to do that,
so I guess maybe the world isn't such a bad place. :-)
--
Like Music?
http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm
attached mail follows:
On Sat, September 23, 2006 10:39 am, Marcus Bointon wrote:
> On 23 Sep 2006, at 16:37, Ray Hauge wrote:
>
>> Could you do something like this?
>>
>> $private = "Myclass"
>> $protected = "*";
>
> No, because if I have a property called 'Myclassfield1', after
> casting to an array I can't tell if it's private property called
> 'field1' or a public property called 'Myclassfield1'.
Don't do that. :-)
> I think it's just plain wrong. Arrays should not try to be objects.
> You can find out protection level of a property via introspection of
> the object that you have in hand. In the vast majority of cases,
> you'll want it to act just like the docs say it does, and if you
> don't, you should probably be using the object itself anyway.
Perhaps it would also be accurate to say that Objects should not try
to be Arrays? :-)
Seriously.
I mean, the type coercion object->array made sense in PHP3 and even
PHP4 where an Object was not much more than a glorified struct, or an
array with some extra baggage.
You start using that PHP5 private/protected stuff, and it just doesn't
make sense to coerce it to an array, imho.
YMMV
--
Like Music?
http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm
attached mail follows:
On 26 Sep 2006, at 23:52, Richard Lynch wrote:
> You start using that PHP5 private/protected stuff, and it just doesn't
> make sense to coerce it to an array, imho.
I'm quite aware of that, and in this case I'm using it in a one-off
string-and-glue fix for a specific problem until I fix it properly.
The original question wasn't whether it was a good idea or not, but
that it didn't act as the docs said it did. In the mean time, you
might like to know that this behaviour IS apparently considered
correct and a patch to documentation has been committed.
Marcus
--
Marcus Bointon
Synchromedia Limited: Creators of http://www.smartmessages.net/
marcussynchromedia.co.uk | http://www.synchromedia.co.uk/
attached mail follows:
Hi,
Like to get some advice from you guys...
I've a html form page and the "Action" is link to a php script to
process the form data....I would like to have a progress bar once the
user hit the Submit button...The php script take quite sometime to
produce the result since it is connecting to a remote database...
How can I do this using PHP to display the progress bar..
Thanks a million...
Choy
attached mail follows:
The FTP will be slower, almost for sure.
He's doing it because he can FTP in as himself, and not as the
"nobody" user Apache runs as.
Your webhost has you running as yourself already, so you can chmod
your files at will in PHP.
On Mon, September 25, 2006 2:11 pm, Andy Hultgren wrote:
> Tedd,
>
> Thanks so much your thorough response - it's good to know that I'm not
> the
> only one trying to figure this out! I'm curious, in your code you use
> the
> PHP ftp functions, but I have used the PHP functions chmod() and
> mkdir()
> without establishing an ftp connection. Is it faster to establish an
> ftp
> connection within PHP and then use the ftp series of functions to
> accomplish
> all of the directory creation and permissions changes? If so, then I
> will
> probably change my code to follow yours.
>
> Andy
>
>
> On 9/25/06, tedd <teddsperling.com> wrote:
>>
>> At 9:32 PM -0600 9/24/06, Andy Hultgren wrote:
>> >Hi Tedd,
>> >
>> >Yes, when I browse to www.myDomain.com I get the index.html file,
>> and so
>> I
>> >have been leaving the .public_html/ directory alone since it is not
>> my
>> >root. I'm curious, what you described is exactly what I'm trying
>> to do -
>> >what permissions do you set the parent folder at when you are
>> finished
>> >uploading/saving/downloading/etc.? I have my "uploaded_images/"
>> >directory set at chmod 0100 and I can still browse to an uploaded
>> image
>> from
>> >my file upload page... Thanks for your response,
>>
>>
>> Andy:
>>
>> I ran into the same problem trying to work with, and understand,
>> permissions on a virtual host. When I asked this gang about
>> permissions some time back, I received answers that ranged from RTFM
>> to calling me stupid for using 0777, but none answered my question.
>> No fault of the gang, I probably didn't ask the question correctly.
>> In any event, I felt too stupid to ask the question again, so I went
>> elsewhere looking for answers and eventually found something that
>> works for me.
>>
>> Some consider me a novice, so I'll ask the gang to overview my
>> comments to make sure that I'm not guiding you down the wrong path.
>>
>> As you know, the key to setting the permissions of a file depends
>> upon the permissions the parent folder. If the parent folder
>> permission is set to 0777, then we can change any files inside the
>> folder as we want. However, that also presents a major security hole
>> because then anyone can use that folder to upload and run evil code.
>>
>> So, the key problem is how to alter parent folder permissions.
>>
>> With virtual hosting, we can upload, manage, and set permissions as
>> we want via our FTP connection software. So, I thought perhaps php
>> had something like that and as such I discovered how to ftp connect
>> via php.
>>
>> Now, not all php ftp_<commands> are available to php 4, but you can
>> connect to your site and change permissions of folders, which is
>> what
>> we actually need. So, if you want to do something with a file: then
>> change the folder permissions of the folder that holds it; do
>> whatever you want with the file; and then change the folder
>> permissions back to something safe.
>>
>> You can also create new folders if you want using the command
>> ftp_mkdir().
>>
>> Note, the beginning of the ftp_paths are different than url paths we
>> would normally use to locate a file. For example:
>>
>> An example web path:
>>
>> http://www.yourdomain.com/rw/tmp/text.txt
>>
>> An example symbolic link:
>>
>> public_html/rw/tmp/text.txt
>>
>> The following code will show you an example of how this works. Just
>> put in your own domain, user id, password, and correct paths and try
>> it out. Change the permissions in the code and watch how the file
>> permissions change.
>>
>> Please let me know if this works for you -- watch for line breaks.
>>
>> hth's
>>
>> tedd
>>
>> PS: I don't know what to say about your ".public_html/" directory,
>> but I would just leave it alone.
>>
>> ---
>>
>> // how to call the function
>>
>> <?php
>>
>> $ftp_path = "public_html/rw/"; // note the ftp path
>> $theDir = "tmp";
>> $theFile ="text.txt";
>> FtpPerms($ftp_path, $theDir, $theFile);
>> ?>
>>
>>
>> // the function
>>
>> <?php
>> // create directory and change permissions via FTP connection
>>
>> function FtpPerms($path, $theDir, $theFile)
>> {
>>
>> $server='ftp.yourdomain.com'; // ftp server
>> $connection = ftp_connect($server); // connection
>>
>> $user = "you";
>> $pass = "yourpassword";
>> $result = ftp_login($connection, $user, $pass); // login to ftp
>> server
>>
>> if ((!$connection) || (!$result))
>> {
>> echo("No connection<br/>");
>> return false;
>> exit();
>> }
>> else
>> {
>> echo("Made connection<br/>");
>> ftp_chdir($connection, $path); // go to destination dir
>>
>> echo("Change permission<br/>");
>> $str="CHMOD 0755 " . $theDir; // change permissions for dir (note
>> the
>> space after 0775 )
>> ftp_site($connection, $str);
>> echo("$str<br/>");
>>
>> $filename = "$theDir/$theFile";
>> $contents = "This is the contents of the file.";
>>
>> echo("<hr><br/>Writing file <br/><br/>");
>>
>> $file = fopen( $filename, "w" );
>> fwrite( $file, $contents);
>> fclose( $file );
>> chmod($filename,0755);
>>
>> echo("Change permission<br/>");
>> $str="CHMOD 0600 " . $theDir; // change permissions back for dir
>> ftp_site($connection, $str);
>> echo("$str<br/>");
>>
>>
>> echo("Close connection<br/>");
>> ftp_close($connection); // close connection
>> }
>>
>> }
>> ?>
>> --
>> -------
>> http://sperling.com http://ancientstones.com
>> http://earthstones.com
>>
>> --
>> PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
>> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>>
>>
>
--
Like Music?
http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm
attached mail follows:
On Mon, September 25, 2006 3:58 pm, Andy Hultgren wrote:
> So I tried to implement the example code given in the php tmpfile()
> documentation and it wouldn't do anything, which suggests that I don't
> have
> access to the /tmp directory. Also, the FAQ's section on my server's
> website say that /tmp is not shared between the servers. So, looks
> like
> /tmp option is out...
Did they perhaps give you your own "tmp" directory elsewhere?...
Sometimes you just need to poke at it to figure out where your "tmp"
is, and then you can use the PHP functions that let you specify your
own directory, but not the ones that assume that system /tmp is your
"tmp"
My host has a "tmp" dir I can use, but it ain't /tmp, and PHP
routinely tries to use /tmp with some functions. Grrrr.
> So, let me see if I understand the situation I'm looking at here:
>
> The bad side:
> -- I don't have any place to put uploaded files outside of my webtree,
> which
> makes it tough to ensure these files cannot be surfed to once they are
> uploaded, and also means I have to do my security checks while the
> files are
> within my webtree and potentially accessible. (BAD).
Yes.
Though if file uploads are working at all, looking at the $_FILES
array may give you a clue as to a directory that you maybe *can*
access which is your own private "tmp"...
> -- Any php script on my server (created by me or somehow maliciously
> uploaded) can do whatever it wants within my account because all php
> scripts run as me. (also BAD).
On the plus side, some of the coding gets real simple, since you are
you, and you are never somebody else. :-)
> The good side:
> -- Uploaded files can be chmod so that nobody can read them, then I
> chmod
> them when I need to use them. This adds a layer of protection for
> completely uploaded files. I assume this will not help with files
> while
> they are getting their security checks, since PHP has to be able to
> read and
> execute them in order to run the checks (get_image_size, etc.)?
PHP needs to read them for get_image_size, but not execute.
Use minimum force needed.
If you are flipping the chmod around within your scripts, that reduces
your risk to however long the dir remains in its 0777 (or whatever)
state, which is however long your script takes to process whatever it
has to process in that state.
So long exhaustive checks of the validity of a file are "bad" because
that leaves that window open longer, but they're "good" because the
file is then more likely to be kosher.
> -- Since I'm only allowing image uploads, I can strictly filter which
> files
> are allowed to be uploaded (with extension checks and get_image_size).
Extension check is kinda useless...
I can name any file I want with .jpg and upload it.
get_image_size() is good, as it checks the first N bytes -- But
somebody somewhere can construct a worm with the first N bytes that
LOOK like a valid image, to get_image_size()
A human eyeball check would be even better, as then you *know* that a
much larger number of bytes are a valid image.
It could still be "image+worm" with the worm tacked on at the end, and
a valid image at the front, which the browser would probably just go
ahead and display as valid image. :-(
The odds of somebody able to construct a valid-looking image whose
exact byte sequence is also a worm are pretty low, but not
impossible... :-)
> (Plus
> all the stuff talked about in the PHP Security Guide provided by the
> PHP
> Security Consortium for html POSTs, MySQL stuff, cookies, etc. Well,
> all of
> it that I can implement without having access to a directory outside
> of my
> webtree anyway).
Be careful.
It's entirely possible that *some* of the advice would put you at
higher risk with your setup, if their assumption is the "nobody" user
and a directory outside web-tree.
So just because you *CAN* implement your advice in your situation,
won't mean you should.
You're going to have to examine every little thing on a case-by-case
basis with your Security Hat on firmly -- Which means thinking "If I
was Evil, how would I break this?"
> So, given this situation (if I've got it right), I have two questions:
>
> 1) With the above "as is", am I just asking for anyone to come in and
> tear
> my site apart? I am not an experienced web developer (obviously), but
> I
> love to read. Is that enough to build a secure site, or am I just way
> in
> over my head?
There's no such thing as "a secure site"...
A secure site is not an off/on switch. It's more a gradient from
horrible to very strong.
And the act of building a Secure site is not even just a question of
following all the "rules" in http://phpsec.org and so on.
It's a thought process, a living breathing intelligent human actually
*thinking* about what they are doing, and what the Risks are, and what
the Benefits are, and trying to consider every possible angle of every
decision.
Are you building an e-commerce site, right out of the gate, on a
server configured like this? Bad Idea.
Are you building just a photo upload site? Probably with a lot of
thought and reading and even more thinking, you can do fine.
You're just going to have to substitute thinking with your own brain
for following the standard advice. :-)
It's certainly going to be better for you in the long run, if nothing
else, as you'll actually THINK more about this stuff than just
following instructions.
> 2) Imaging that I can convince my host to rebuild my site so that I
> have
> access to directories outside of my webtree and can check and save
> uploaded
> files there, does that make the situation substantially better? Or is
> the
> "PHP running as me" thing enough alone to raise some serious serious
> problems (perhaps less around the image uploading but more around a
> login
> page or something)?
In some ways, having the server running as you is "better" for
security, as any files that you do *NOT* want other users on the same
server to see, you can more easily chmod them to be 0600 or 0400 or
whatever, so only YOU can do anything with them.
So when you read advice to use 0777 you can immediately change that to
0700, because the only access needed is for you, not your group, and
not the "world" of other users on that machine.
The downside is that if somebody does manage to inject any PHP code
(or any other executable code) their injection will be far more
powerful, as it runs as you, a powerful user, and not "nobody" a
powerless users.
So you'll want to be even more careful than usual with the file
uploads to be sure they do not contain any harmful executable
script/code.
--
Like Music?
http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm
attached mail follows:
On Sat, September 23, 2006 1:10 am, Michael Williams wrote:
> Is there any way at all by which to persist cookies across cURL
> sessions? Basically I have a login page that sets cookies and looks
> for them for "logged in" status so that the user may use the site to
> their heart's content. The problem with cURL, however, appears that
> after the initial login, any further attempts are foiled by the fact
> that the cookies don't remain. How exactly should I go about doing
> this?
curl_setopt($curl, CURLOPT_COOKIEFILE,
'/full/path/to/php/writeable/file');
curl_setopt($curl, CURLOPT_COOKIES, '/full/path/to/php/writeable/file');
NOTE:
I probably got the CURLOPT_* thingies wrong. RTFM.
BUG:
If you are also trying to get the Headers with that other CURLOPT,
then curl just plain won't do the Cookies for you :-(
Then you have the joy of writing a header parser for getting the
Cookies, and sending out headers with your curl request to send the
cookies.
It can't be that tricky, cuz before I found the CURLOPT_* above, I
used to do that. :-)
--
Like Music?
http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm
attached mail follows:
On Fri, September 22, 2006 4:48 pm, Michelle Konzack wrote:
> I like to have html files which I can put on my internal
> documentation server.
I believe http://mirrors.php.net or somesuch has instructions on how
to++ run your own private mirror, with (or without) UCN*
* UCN - User Contributed Notes
++ And how *not* to do it, as you'll tick them off. :-)
--
Like Music?
http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm
attached mail follows:
Michelle Konzack wrote:
> Am 2006-09-25 08:33:52, schrieb Ray Hauge:
>
>> It's not the best in the world, but it works.
>>
>> http://xchm.sourceforge.net/index.html
>>
>> But since the documentation is online and always updated that way, I
>> prefer to just use the website.
>
> Me too, but IF you live mobil like me (I have an 88-tons MAN-SuperTruck
> as MotorCaravan) you wil not have Internet Access all the time. OK, I
> have GlobelSat but it is quiet expensive because I pay for the traffic.
88 tons!! Point us to an image of that please.
Cheers
--
David Robley
"I'd love some Chinese food," said Tom wantonly.
Today is Setting Orange, the 51st day of Bureaucracy in the YOLD 3172.
attached mail follows:
Hi List,
Sorry to bore most of you with this one but i cannot get extensions to
load using latest php5, apache 2.0xxx
I have std php running and it tells me that my php.ini is being read
from c:\php\php.ini. This is correct.
But what ever i change "extension_dir" to it always says "c:\php5". By
the way i am using phpinfo() for this info.
I make c:\php5 and copy extentions in there, but they still dont load
and yes i have uncommented out the relevant extension in php.ini
I always stop -> start apache for changes to take affect but nothing
changes.
I have php in the system path.
I also have tried copying the extension to windoze and system32 but
still they will not load.
ANy ideas ??????
Dave
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]