|
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-help
lists.php.net
Date: Wed Apr 23 2008 - 20:32:24 CDT
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
php-general Digest 24 Apr 2008 01:32:24 -0000 Issue 5421
Topics (messages 273464 through 273508):
Re: php framework vs just php?
273464 by: Aschwin Wesselius
273465 by: Robert Cummings
273466 by: Jay Blanchard
273468 by: David Giragosian
273475 by: tedd
273479 by: tedd
273485 by: Nathan Nobbe
273486 by: Eric Butera
273487 by: Nathan Nobbe
273490 by: Robert Cummings
273495 by: Nathan Nobbe
273503 by: Shawn McKenzie
273507 by: Robert Cummings
273508 by: Shawn McKenzie
mb_convert_encoding converting to ASCII instead of UTF-8
273467 by: Robert William Vesterman
273469 by: Robert William Vesterman
273470 by: Eric Butera
273471 by: Robert William Vesterman
273472 by: Robert William Vesterman
273473 by: tedd
273474 by: Robert William Vesterman
:: breakage - post php 5.2.4
273476 by: Nathan Nobbe
Pc Maintenance and Repairs- Tips on how to get started
273477 by: Ejikeme Princely
Big companies that use PHP?
273478 by: Thiago Pojda
273480 by: Bastien Koert
273481 by: Eric Butera
273482 by: Dan Joseph
273483 by: Thiago Pojda
273484 by: mike
273491 by: Thiago Pojda
273496 by: Nathan Nobbe
273498 by: Wolf
273499 by: Robert Cummings
the most amazing php code i have ever seen so far
273488 by: paragasu
273489 by: mike
Large XML manipulation within PHP
273492 by: Steve Gula
273493 by: Bastien Koert
273494 by: Steve Gula
273497 by: Stut
273500 by: .4u
273501 by: Bojan Tesanovic
Testing HTTPS without certificate
273502 by: Ken Kixmoeller
273504 by: Shawn McKenzie
273505 by: mike
273506 by: Ken Kixmoeller.com
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:
Lester Caine wrote:
> 'If it isn't broken don't fix it' causes a problem when YOU know that
> the step change will make future development easier, but the customers
> keep asking - 'Can you just add XXX' :(
So.... they actually ask for a porn site?
attached mail follows:
On Wed, 2008-04-23 at 13:46 +0200, Aschwin Wesselius wrote:
> Lester Caine wrote:
> > 'If it isn't broken don't fix it' causes a problem when YOU know that
> > the step change will make future development easier, but the customers
> > keep asking - 'Can you just add XXX' :(
>
> So.... they actually ask for a porn site?
*rofl*
--
http://www.interjinn.com
Application and Templating Framework for PHP
attached mail follows:
[snip]
Let me know when as I could do with a good laugh.
[/snip]
Fair enough, you have already given me several! :)
attached mail follows:
At the risk of extending this already looong thread...
Ah, screw it.
I actually read all of the Radicore documentation on Monday following
someone's suggestion last week about module access control. That was
before this thread got started, BTW. Now I'm not a Framework guy at
all, and I don't know nor have ever communicated with Tony, but I was
very impressed with the level of sophistication and conceptual
richness of the Radicore Framework, his insight and solutions for
common issues such as users hitting the 'browser back button' and
having multiple, open instances of a web page, differentiation in
usage of GET and POST, and session management in particular.
I'm happy to entertain and play along with threads that drift into
meta-topic struggles, but honestly, let's not lose the forest for the
trees. There's good stuff in Radicore, as I'm sure there are in some
other frameworks.
--
-David.
When the power of love
overcomes the love of power,
the world will know peace.
-Jimi Hendrix
attached mail follows:
At 3:35 PM +0100 4/22/08, Stut wrote:
>Tony Marston wrote:
>>No I'm not.
>
>Shocking and unexpected opinion from the developer of a framework. NOT!
>
>Anyway, I can see this falling into another lengthy discussion so
>I'll get my contribution in early to avoid disappointment.
>
>As others have mentioned this question is plagued by semantic
>arguments. To me a framework is as much about the way requests are
>routed and handled as it is about utility code.
>
>I don't use what I would call a framework, but I do have a
>well-established file layout for my sites and an extensive library
>of code that covers everything I need to do regularly. If I have an
>itch it doesn't scratch I'll write it in a reusable way. The file
>layout and code library has definitely been put through it's paces
>and is currently in use on a 1.4m+ UUpM (~18m PVpM) site and several
>smaller properties so I know it works securely, reliably and it
>scales.
>
>I don't use third-party code libraries unless there's no other way
>of doing it or time constraints are in play. Maybe it's due to past
>experiences or maybe it's just the way I am, but I don't like using
>code written by people I don't know and trust unless I can spend
>time picking it apart, and generally I found it's quicker to start
>again.
>
>It's also worth noting the shocking quality of some open source
>projects. It may work but do you know how secure and stable it is?
>
>I've been forced to use a couple of "frameworks" in the past and the
>main thing that struck me is that they work far too hard in the name
>of being able to satisfy a wide variety of needs. This not only
>over-complicates the code but can also be a massive drain on runtime
>resources. I understand why they're like this but it's yet another
>reason I stick to my own collection.
>
>Anyways, back to work.
>
>-Stut
Well put.
Not speaking for you, but if we had listened to the "there's only one
way to do it" types, we wouldn't have PC's on our desks but rather
terminals.
As they say in PERL, there's always more than one way to do it.
Cheers,
tedd
--
-------
http://sperling.com http://ancientstones.com http://earthstones.com
attached mail follows:
At 5:24 PM +0300 4/22/08, Sancar Saran wrote:
>Hello there,
>
>Is anyone looking jQuery recently ?. Thas what I call framework...
Yes, and I'm programming with it.
But, that's what jQuery and I call a library.
Cheers,
tedd
--
-------
http://sperling.com http://ancientstones.com http://earthstones.com
attached mail follows:
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 12:29 PM, tedd <tedd.sperlinggmail.com> wrote:
> At 5:24 PM +0300 4/22/08, Sancar Saran wrote:
>
>> Hello there,
>>
>> Is anyone looking jQuery recently ?. Thas what I call framework...
>>
>
> Yes, and I'm programming with it.
>
> But, that's what jQuery and I call a library.
interestingly, prototype claims it is a framework.
-nathan
attached mail follows:
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 2:49 PM, Nathan Nobbe <quickshiftingmail.com> wrote:
> interestingly, prototype claims it is a framework.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=define%3A+framework&btnG=Google+Search
Lots of differing opinions. :) Seeing as script.aculo.us and all
that stuff is written on Prototype, it hits on some of those
definitions.
attached mail follows:
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 1:01 PM, Eric Butera <eric.buteragmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 2:49 PM, Nathan Nobbe <quickshiftingmail.com>
> wrote:
> > interestingly, prototype claims it is a framework.
>
> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=define%3A+framework&btnG=Google+Search
>
> Lots of differing opinions. :) Seeing as script.aculo.us and all
> that stuff is written on Prototype, it hits on some of those
> definitions.
>
one characteristic i would attribute to frameworks is that they impose
global conventions on a project, such as where certain types of files must
reside; whether files can be placed in subdirectories, how urls must be
formed and so on.. libraries can pretty much be included anywhere and the
only conventions they impose is those that could be found in any other group
of packages / classes / functions, proprietary or otherwise.
-nathan
attached mail follows:
On Wed, 2008-04-23 at 13:14 -0600, Nathan Nobbe wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 1:01 PM, Eric Butera <eric.buteragmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 2:49 PM, Nathan Nobbe <quickshiftingmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > interestingly, prototype claims it is a framework.
> >
> > http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=define%3A+framework&btnG=Google+Search
> >
> > Lots of differing opinions. :) Seeing as script.aculo.us and all
> > that stuff is written on Prototype, it hits on some of those
> > definitions.
> >
>
>
> one characteristic i would attribute to frameworks is that they impose
> global conventions on a project, such as where certain types of files must
> reside; whether files can be placed in subdirectories, how urls must be
> formed and so on.. libraries can pretty much be included anywhere and the
> only conventions they impose is those that could be found in any other group
> of packages / classes / functions, proprietary or otherwise.
I'm sure you meant "some" framework do what you've written above.
:)
Cheers,
Rob.
--
http://www.interjinn.com
Application and Templating Framework for PHP
attached mail follows:
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 1:22 PM, Robert Cummings <robertinterjinn.com>
wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2008-04-23 at 13:14 -0600, Nathan Nobbe wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 1:01 PM, Eric Butera <eric.buteragmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 2:49 PM, Nathan Nobbe <quickshiftingmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > interestingly, prototype claims it is a framework.
> > >
> > >
> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=define%3A+framework&btnG=Google+Search
> > >
> > > Lots of differing opinions. :) Seeing as script.aculo.us and all
> > > that stuff is written on Prototype, it hits on some of those
> > > definitions.
> > >
> >
> >
> > one characteristic i would attribute to frameworks is that they impose
> > global conventions on a project, such as where certain types of files
> must
> > reside; whether files can be placed in subdirectories, how urls must be
> > formed and so on.. libraries can pretty much be included anywhere and
> the
> > only conventions they impose is those that could be found in any other
> group
> > of packages / classes / functions, proprietary or otherwise.
>
> I'm sure you meant "some" framework do what you've written above.
>
> :)
sure :)
-nathan
attached mail follows:
Robert Cummings wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-04-22 at 19:05 -0500, Shawn McKenzie wrote:
>> Tony Marston wrote:
>>> ""Jay Blanchard"" <jblanchardpocket.com> wrote in message
>>> news:9F6B7518E92167499E0168D01C2D8D9C41755BYGEX01WAL.onecall.local...
>>> [snip]
>>>>> You haven't answered the question. Where can this piece of wizardry be
>>>>> downloaded so that it can be reviewed by your peers?
>>> [/snip]
>>>
>>>> It is not available for download
>>> So your claims cannot be substantiated by anyone in this group.
>>>
>>>> but it has been reviewed by peers on
>>>> several project teams who have used it. It was developed specifically
>>>> for a company who owns the work product. I have not re-created for
>>>> general use by mere mortals but I will soon.
>>> Let me know when as I could do with a good laugh.
>>>
>> Well, if you would take the time to individually download > 1,000
>> classes and piece them together you may find a very feature rich
>> framework: http://www.phpclasses.org. Or maybe meta storage
>> http://www.meta-language.net/metastorage.html.
>
> Or you may find you've got >999 classes of code you'll never use :) That
> would be one hell of an undertaking to piece them together. I'm going to
> guess you'll need namespaces too since I bet some of them step on each
> other's toes.
>
> Cheers,
> Rob.
Obviously not a very good one, but that was in the spirit of a joke. ;-)
-Shawn
attached mail follows:
On Wed, 2008-04-23 at 16:50 -0500, Shawn McKenzie wrote:
> Robert Cummings wrote:
> > On Tue, 2008-04-22 at 19:05 -0500, Shawn McKenzie wrote:
> >> Tony Marston wrote:
> >>> ""Jay Blanchard"" <jblanchardpocket.com> wrote in message
> >>> news:9F6B7518E92167499E0168D01C2D8D9C41755BYGEX01WAL.onecall.local...
> >>> [snip]
> >>>>> You haven't answered the question. Where can this piece of wizardry be
> >>>>> downloaded so that it can be reviewed by your peers?
> >>> [/snip]
> >>>
> >>>> It is not available for download
> >>> So your claims cannot be substantiated by anyone in this group.
> >>>
> >>>> but it has been reviewed by peers on
> >>>> several project teams who have used it. It was developed specifically
> >>>> for a company who owns the work product. I have not re-created for
> >>>> general use by mere mortals but I will soon.
> >>> Let me know when as I could do with a good laugh.
> >>>
> >> Well, if you would take the time to individually download > 1,000
> >> classes and piece them together you may find a very feature rich
> >> framework: http://www.phpclasses.org. Or maybe meta storage
> >> http://www.meta-language.net/metastorage.html.
> >
> > Or you may find you've got >999 classes of code you'll never use :) That
> > would be one hell of an undertaking to piece them together. I'm going to
> > guess you'll need namespaces too since I bet some of them step on each
> > other's toes.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Rob.
>
> Obviously not a very good one, but that was in the spirit of a joke. ;-)
I took it that way :)
Cheers,
Rob.
--
http://www.interjinn.com
Application and Templating Framework for PHP
attached mail follows:
Robert Cummings wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-04-23 at 16:50 -0500, Shawn McKenzie wrote:
>
>> Robert Cummings wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 2008-04-22 at 19:05 -0500, Shawn McKenzie wrote:
>>>
>>>> Tony Marston wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> ""Jay Blanchard"" <jblanchardpocket.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:9F6B7518E92167499E0168D01C2D8D9C41755BYGEX01WAL.onecall.local...
>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>
>>>>>>> You haven't answered the question. Where can this piece of wizardry be
>>>>>>> downloaded so that it can be reviewed by your peers?
>>>>>>>
>>>>> [/snip]
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> It is not available for download
>>>>>>
>>>>> So your claims cannot be substantiated by anyone in this group.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> but it has been reviewed by peers on
>>>>>> several project teams who have used it. It was developed specifically
>>>>>> for a company who owns the work product. I have not re-created for
>>>>>> general use by mere mortals but I will soon.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Let me know when as I could do with a good laugh.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Well, if you would take the time to individually download > 1,000
>>>> classes and piece them together you may find a very feature rich
>>>> framework: http://www.phpclasses.org. Or maybe meta storage
>>>> http://www.meta-language.net/metastorage.html.
>>>>
>>> Or you may find you've got >999 classes of code you'll never use :) That
>>> would be one hell of an undertaking to piece them together. I'm going to
>>> guess you'll need namespaces too since I bet some of them step on each
>>> other's toes.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Rob.
>>>
>> Obviously not a very good one, but that was in the spirit of a joke. ;-)
>>
>
> I took it that way :)
>
> Cheers,
> Rob.
>
Then say haha, not a long dissection of how sorry and shitty my post was :-)
-Shawn
attached mail follows:
I've run into a problem where mb_convert_encoding seems to be converting
to ASCII, even though I'm telling it to convert to UTF-8. This is with
PHP version 4.3.11.
I had been asking it to convert from "auto" to UTF-8, so at first I
thought maybe "auto" was not the right choice. So I called
"mb_detect_encoding" to see the format of what I was trying to convert;
it said it was already UTF-8 (before I did the conversion).
So then I thought maybe I got the "from" and "to" parameters backwards
(although I was confident I was following the documentation), so I
changed mb_convert_encoding to use "UTF-8" as /both/ the from and to.
It still converts to ASCII.
I understand that, given that it's already UTF-8, I don't need to
convert it to UTF-8. But other things that I receive might /not/ be
UTF-8, so I am still concerned with this.
Sample code:
<html><head><title>Minnie</title></head><body><p>
<?php
$x = $_REQUEST['Minnie'];
echo $x . ' ... ' . mb_detect_encoding ( $x ) . '<br/>';
$x = mb_convert_encoding ( $x, "UTF-8", "UTF-8" );
echo $x . ' ... ' . mb_detect_encoding ( $x ) . '<br/>';
?>
</p></body></html>
Output, when called with URL parameter "Minnie=Miñoso":
Miñoso ... UTF-8
Mioso ... ASCII
Then I changed the "from" so that I could try converting from something
other than UTF-8:
$x = mb_convert_encoding ( $x, "UTF-8", mb_detect_encoding ( $x ) );
And now, output when called with "Minnie=Mouse":
Mouse ... ASCII
Mouse ... ASCII
Does anyone have any idea what's going on here? Am I doing something wrong?
Thanks in advance for any help.
attached mail follows:
A little additional info: The "ASCII to ASCII" case for "Minnie=Mouse"
is merely because the UTF-8 encoding for "Mouse" is the same as the
ASCII encoding for "Mouse", and mb_detect_encoding is matching on ASCII
before UTF-8. So that's not an issue.
But, the "UTF-8 to ASCII" case for "Minnie=Miñoso" is still (seemingly)
screwy.
Robert William Vesterman wrote:
> I've run into a problem where mb_convert_encoding seems to be
> converting to ASCII, even though I'm telling it to convert to UTF-8.
> This is with PHP version 4.3.11.
>
> I had been asking it to convert from "auto" to UTF-8, so at first I
> thought maybe "auto" was not the right choice. So I called
> "mb_detect_encoding" to see the format of what I was trying to
> convert; it said it was already UTF-8 (before I did the conversion).
> So then I thought maybe I got the "from" and "to" parameters backwards
> (although I was confident I was following the documentation), so I
> changed mb_convert_encoding to use "UTF-8" as /both/ the from and to.
>
> It still converts to ASCII.
>
> I understand that, given that it's already UTF-8, I don't need to
> convert it to UTF-8. But other things that I receive might /not/ be
> UTF-8, so I am still concerned with this.
>
> Sample code:
>
> <html><head><title>Minnie</title></head><body><p>
> <?php
> $x = $_REQUEST['Minnie'];
> echo $x . ' ... ' . mb_detect_encoding ( $x ) . '<br/>';
> $x = mb_convert_encoding ( $x, "UTF-8", "UTF-8" );
> echo $x . ' ... ' . mb_detect_encoding ( $x ) . '<br/>';
> ?>
> </p></body></html>
>
> Output, when called with URL parameter "Minnie=Miñoso":
>
> Miñoso ... UTF-8
> Mioso ... ASCII
>
> Then I changed the "from" so that I could try converting from
> something other than UTF-8:
>
> $x = mb_convert_encoding ( $x, "UTF-8", mb_detect_encoding ( $x ) );
>
> And now, output when called with "Minnie=Mouse":
>
> Mouse ... ASCII
> Mouse ... ASCII
>
> Does anyone have any idea what's going on here? Am I doing something
> wrong?
>
> Thanks in advance for any help.
>
>
attached mail follows:
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 10:40 AM, Robert William Vesterman
<bobdigitalarts.com> wrote:
> I've run into a problem where mb_convert_encoding seems to be converting to
> ASCII, even though I'm telling it to convert to UTF-8. This is with PHP
> version 4.3.11.
>
> I had been asking it to convert from "auto" to UTF-8, so at first I thought
> maybe "auto" was not the right choice. So I called "mb_detect_encoding" to
> see the format of what I was trying to convert; it said it was already UTF-8
> (before I did the conversion).
> So then I thought maybe I got the "from" and "to" parameters backwards
> (although I was confident I was following the documentation), so I changed
> mb_convert_encoding to use "UTF-8" as /both/ the from and to.
>
> It still converts to ASCII.
>
> I understand that, given that it's already UTF-8, I don't need to convert
> it to UTF-8. But other things that I receive might /not/ be UTF-8, so I am
> still concerned with this.
>
> Sample code:
>
> <html><head><title>Minnie</title></head><body><p>
> <?php
> $x = $_REQUEST['Minnie'];
> echo $x . ' ... ' . mb_detect_encoding ( $x ) . '<br/>';
> $x = mb_convert_encoding ( $x, "UTF-8", "UTF-8" );
> echo $x . ' ... ' . mb_detect_encoding ( $x ) . '<br/>';
> ?>
> </p></body></html>
>
> Output, when called with URL parameter "Minnie=Miñoso":
>
> Miñoso ... UTF-8
> Mioso ... ASCII
>
> Then I changed the "from" so that I could try converting from something
> other than UTF-8:
>
> $x = mb_convert_encoding ( $x, "UTF-8", mb_detect_encoding ( $x ) );
>
> And now, output when called with "Minnie=Mouse":
>
> Mouse ... ASCII
> Mouse ... ASCII
>
> Does anyone have any idea what's going on here? Am I doing something wrong?
>
> Thanks in advance for any help.
>
>
> --
> PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>
#1 Upgrade your php version. Yours is over 3 years old [1].
#2 Maybe something here [2] will help you.
[1] http://www.php.net/ChangeLog-4.php#4.3.11
[2] http://www.phpwact.org/php/i18n/charsets
attached mail follows:
OK, now the problem seems to be not that mb_convert_encoding is encoding
incorrectly, it's that mb_detect_encoding is detecting incorrectly.
It's claiming that the raw string as received from the browser is UTF-8,
where in reality it seems to be ISO-8859-1. Sample code:
<html><head><title>Minnie</title></head><body><p>
<?php
function output ( $label, $x ) {
echo $label . ': ' . $x . ' ... ' . mb_detect_encoding ( $x ) .
'<br/>';
}
$x = $_REQUEST['Minnie'];
output ( "Raw", $x );
output ( "Convert from detected",
mb_convert_encoding ( $x, "UTF-8", mb_detect_encoding ( $x ) ) );
output ( "Convert from ISO",
mb_convert_encoding ( $x, "UTF-8", "ISO-8859-1" ) );
?>
</p></body></html>
Output for "Minnie=Mi%F1oso":
Raw: Mi?oso ... UTF-8
Convert from detected: Mioso ... ASCII
Convert from ISO: Miñoso ... UTF-8
Robert William Vesterman wrote:
> A little additional info: The "ASCII to ASCII" case for "Minnie=Mouse"
> is merely because the UTF-8 encoding for "Mouse" is the same as the
> ASCII encoding for "Mouse", and mb_detect_encoding is matching on
> ASCII before UTF-8. So that's not an issue.
>
> But, the "UTF-8 to ASCII" case for "Minnie=Miñoso" is still
> (seemingly) screwy.
>
> Robert William Vesterman wrote:
>> I've run into a problem where mb_convert_encoding seems to be
>> converting to ASCII, even though I'm telling it to convert to UTF-8.
>> This is with PHP version 4.3.11.
>>
>> I had been asking it to convert from "auto" to UTF-8, so at first I
>> thought maybe "auto" was not the right choice. So I called
>> "mb_detect_encoding" to see the format of what I was trying to
>> convert; it said it was already UTF-8 (before I did the conversion).
>> So then I thought maybe I got the "from" and "to" parameters
>> backwards (although I was confident I was following the
>> documentation), so I changed mb_convert_encoding to use "UTF-8" as
>> /both/ the from and to.
>>
>> It still converts to ASCII.
>>
>> I understand that, given that it's already UTF-8, I don't need to
>> convert it to UTF-8. But other things that I receive might /not/ be
>> UTF-8, so I am still concerned with this.
>>
>> Sample code:
>>
>> <html><head><title>Minnie</title></head><body><p>
>> <?php
>> $x = $_REQUEST['Minnie'];
>> echo $x . ' ... ' . mb_detect_encoding ( $x ) . '<br/>';
>> $x = mb_convert_encoding ( $x, "UTF-8", "UTF-8" );
>> echo $x . ' ... ' . mb_detect_encoding ( $x ) . '<br/>';
>> ?>
>> </p></body></html>
>>
>> Output, when called with URL parameter "Minnie=Miñoso":
>>
>> Miñoso ... UTF-8
>> Mioso ... ASCII
>>
>> Then I changed the "from" so that I could try converting from
>> something other than UTF-8:
>>
>> $x = mb_convert_encoding ( $x, "UTF-8", mb_detect_encoding ( $x ) );
>>
>> And now, output when called with "Minnie=Mouse":
>>
>> Mouse ... ASCII
>> Mouse ... ASCII
>>
>> Does anyone have any idea what's going on here? Am I doing something
>> wrong?
>>
>> Thanks in advance for any help.
>>
>>
>
>
attached mail follows:
And the culprit is that mb_detect_order() wasn't set up to handle
ISO-8859-1. It was "ASCII, UTF-8". Changing it to "ASCII, UTF-8,
ISO-8859-1" makes everything work as expected.
Robert William Vesterman wrote:
> OK, now the problem seems to be not that mb_convert_encoding is
> encoding incorrectly, it's that mb_detect_encoding is detecting
> incorrectly. It's claiming that the raw string as received from the
> browser is UTF-8, where in reality it seems to be ISO-8859-1. Sample
> code:
>
> <html><head><title>Minnie</title></head><body><p>
> <?php
> function output ( $label, $x ) {
> echo $label . ': ' . $x . ' ... ' . mb_detect_encoding ( $x ) .
> '<br/>';
> }
>
> $x = $_REQUEST['Minnie'];
> output ( "Raw", $x );
> output ( "Convert from detected",
> mb_convert_encoding ( $x, "UTF-8", mb_detect_encoding ( $x ) ) );
> output ( "Convert from ISO",
> mb_convert_encoding ( $x, "UTF-8", "ISO-8859-1" ) );
> ?>
> </p></body></html>
>
> Output for "Minnie=Mi%F1oso":
>
> Raw: Mi?oso ... UTF-8
> Convert from detected: Mioso ... ASCII
> Convert from ISO: Miñoso ... UTF-8
>
> Robert William Vesterman wrote:
>> A little additional info: The "ASCII to ASCII" case for
>> "Minnie=Mouse" is merely because the UTF-8 encoding for "Mouse" is
>> the same as the ASCII encoding for "Mouse", and mb_detect_encoding is
>> matching on ASCII before UTF-8. So that's not an issue.
>>
>> But, the "UTF-8 to ASCII" case for "Minnie=Miñoso" is still
>> (seemingly) screwy.
>>
>> Robert William Vesterman wrote:
>>> I've run into a problem where mb_convert_encoding seems to be
>>> converting to ASCII, even though I'm telling it to convert to
>>> UTF-8. This is with PHP version 4.3.11.
>>>
>>> I had been asking it to convert from "auto" to UTF-8, so at first I
>>> thought maybe "auto" was not the right choice. So I called
>>> "mb_detect_encoding" to see the format of what I was trying to
>>> convert; it said it was already UTF-8 (before I did the conversion).
>>> So then I thought maybe I got the "from" and "to" parameters
>>> backwards (although I was confident I was following the
>>> documentation), so I changed mb_convert_encoding to use "UTF-8" as
>>> /both/ the from and to.
>>>
>>> It still converts to ASCII.
>>>
>>> I understand that, given that it's already UTF-8, I don't need to
>>> convert it to UTF-8. But other things that I receive might /not/ be
>>> UTF-8, so I am still concerned with this.
>>>
>>> Sample code:
>>>
>>> <html><head><title>Minnie</title></head><body><p>
>>> <?php
>>> $x = $_REQUEST['Minnie'];
>>> echo $x . ' ... ' . mb_detect_encoding ( $x ) . '<br/>';
>>> $x = mb_convert_encoding ( $x, "UTF-8", "UTF-8" );
>>> echo $x . ' ... ' . mb_detect_encoding ( $x ) . '<br/>';
>>> ?>
>>> </p></body></html>
>>>
>>> Output, when called with URL parameter "Minnie=Miñoso":
>>>
>>> Miñoso ... UTF-8
>>> Mioso ... ASCII
>>>
>>> Then I changed the "from" so that I could try converting from
>>> something other than UTF-8:
>>>
>>> $x = mb_convert_encoding ( $x, "UTF-8", mb_detect_encoding ( $x ) );
>>>
>>> And now, output when called with "Minnie=Mouse":
>>>
>>> Mouse ... ASCII
>>> Mouse ... ASCII
>>>
>>> Does anyone have any idea what's going on here? Am I doing something
>>> wrong?
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance for any help.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
attached mail follows:
At 11:28 AM -0400 4/23/08, Robert William Vesterman wrote:
>A little additional info: The "ASCII to ASCII"
>case for "Minnie=Mouse" is merely because the
>UTF-8 encoding for "Mouse" is the same as the
>ASCII encoding for "Mouse", and
>mb_detect_encoding is matching on ASCII before
>UTF-8. So that's not an issue.
>
>But, the "UTF-8 to ASCII" case for
>"Minnie=Miñoso" is still (seemingly) screwy.
Going for "UTF-8 to ASCII" is not going to work.
The ASCII to UTF-8 works because ASCII is
contained within UTF8. But the reverse is not
true. Not all of UTF-8 is contained within ASCII.
For example, the character (code-point) ñ does
not appear in ASCII, so that doesn't work.
Cheers,
tedd
--
-------
http://sperling.com http://ancientstones.com http://earthstones.com
attached mail follows:
I wasn't saying I was /telling/ it to go from UTF-8 to ASCII. I was
saying it /was/ going from UTF-8 to ASCII, despite the fact that I was
telling it to go from UTF-8 to UTF-8.
And as noted previously in this thread, it turned out to be because
mb_detect_encoding was /mistakenly/ detecting it as UTF-8 in the first
place. It was actually ISO-8859-1, not UTF-8. So when I told it to
convert from UTF-8 (which mb_detect_encoding said it was),
mb_convert_encoding ran into a non-UTF-8 character (the ñ), and so threw
it away. The generated output was therefore all straight ASCII
characters, which mb_detect_encoding therefore said was ASCII.
tedd wrote:
> At 11:28 AM -0400 4/23/08, Robert William Vesterman wrote:
>> A little additional info: The "ASCII to ASCII" case for
>> "Minnie=Mouse" is merely because the UTF-8 encoding for "Mouse" is
>> the same as the ASCII encoding for "Mouse", and mb_detect_encoding is
>> matching on ASCII before UTF-8. So that's not an issue.
>>
>> But, the "UTF-8 to ASCII" case for "Minnie=Miñoso" is still
>> (seemingly) screwy.
>
> Going for "UTF-8 to ASCII" is not going to work. The ASCII to UTF-8
> works because ASCII is contained within UTF8. But the reverse is not
> true. Not all of UTF-8 is contained within ASCII.
>
> For example, the character (code-point) ñ does not appear in ASCII, so
> that doesn't work.
>
> Cheers,
>
> tedd
>
attached mail follows:
all,
i have observed breakage in some of the class functionality involving the
scope resolution operator in php after php 5.2.4. in said version strings
holding class names can be used w/ the scope resolution operator to resolve
static members and class constants. this no longer works in php 5.2.5; ive
just installed 5.2.6_rc3 and found that it is not fixed there either. im
told this will be restored in 5.3; but if it was working in 5.2.4, why
remove it in versions between 5.2.5 (inclusive) and 5.3 (exclusive)?
this results in some rather ugly workarounds. im curious if anyone else has
noticed this or knows more about it.
-nathan
attached mail follows:
Pc Maintenance and Repairs- Tips on how to get started
In this tutorial i am going to teach on how to maintain and repair your computer system,
but i am going to start with introduction to the various parts of the computer hardware.
In a computer system we have the main hardware parts they are
1 CD/DVD DRIVE
2. HARD DISK
3. FLOPPY DISK
4. CPU
5. VGA CARD
6. RAM
7. POWER PARK
8. MOTHER BOARD
All these are what are seen inside a typical computer system unit.
The cd/dvd drive is where you put and play your cd/dvd. The hard disk is the main memory of your computer, the floppy disk is where you put floppy disk, the CPU is the processor of the computer. The VGA card known as Video graphic adapter is your video card where you connect your monitor. Most computers come with in-built VGA adapter. The Ram which is short form for random access memory is the memory that stores the operating system and its programs when you boot your computer it is called random access memory because it is volatile, i.e any information stored in it will be lost when there is power failure.The power pack is the power panel of the computer and the mother board is the main board of the computer system where all these computer parts are connected. I have a video tutorial that will show you all the various computer parts shown above and how they are connected. The video is a good guide on identifying various parts of the computer and how the
are connected
The link to the video is below. In the next tutorial i am going to look at how to increase the ram and add extra hard disk
Watch this free Video tutorial at http://www.44eu.com/dating/viewVideo.php?fileID=12
My name is Ejikeme Princely and my website is http://www.courtingfree.us a free dating site
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
attached mail follows:
Hey guys,
I've been asked this common question: What big companies use PHP in big
apps?
I don't know where to find this kind of stuff and, well. here I am :)
Do any of you know?
And what % of the web market share does PHP take?
Thanks,
Thiago Pojda
attached mail follows:
On 4/23/08, Thiago Pojda <thiago.pojdasoftpartech.com.br> wrote:
>
> Hey guys,
>
>
>
> I've been asked this common question: What big companies use PHP in big
> apps?
>
>
>
> I don't know where to find this kind of stuff and, well. here I am :)
>
>
>
>
>
> Do any of you know?
>
>
>
> And what % of the web market share does PHP take?
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Thiago Pojda
>
>
Facebook, Wikimedia, Oracle, Yahoo are just a few
--
Bastien
Cat, the other other white meat
attached mail follows:
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 2:32 PM, Thiago Pojda
<thiago.pojdasoftpartech.com.br> wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
>
>
> I've been asked this common question: What big companies use PHP in big
> apps?
>
>
>
> I don't know where to find this kind of stuff and, well. here I am :)
>
>
>
>
>
> Do any of you know?
>
>
>
> And what % of the web market share does PHP take?
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Thiago Pojda
>
>
Yahoo!, Digg, Facebook, and Flickr are a few.
attached mail follows:
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 2:32 PM, Thiago Pojda <
thiago.pojdasoftpartech.com.br> wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
>
>
> I've been asked this common question: What big companies use PHP in big
> apps?
>
>
>
> I don't know where to find this kind of stuff and, well. here I am :)
>
>
>
>
>
> Do any of you know?
>
>
>
> And what % of the web market share does PHP take?
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Thiago Pojda
>
>
I'm with my 3rd company over $100 million in sales per that uses PHP. There
are lots out there.
--
-Dan Joseph
"Build a man a fire, and he will be warm for the rest of the day.
Light a man on fire, and will be warm for the rest of his life."
attached mail follows:
Just found out that Digg, Flickr, fotolog.com are among those. :)
_____
De: Bastien Koert [mailto:phpstergmail.com]
Enviada em: quarta-feira, 23 de abril de 2008 15:32
Para: Thiago Pojda
Cc: php-generallists.php.net
Assunto: Re: [PHP] Big companies that use PHP?
On 4/23/08, Thiago Pojda <thiago.pojdasoftpartech.com.br> wrote:
Hey guys,
I've been asked this common question: What big companies use PHP in big
apps?
I don't know where to find this kind of stuff and, well. here I am :)
Do any of you know?
And what % of the web market share does PHP take?
Thanks,
Thiago Pojda
Facebook, Wikimedia, Oracle, Yahoo are just a few
--
Bastien
Cat, the other other white meat
attached mail follows:
We're using it at Intel on a handful of sites... I think my team is
the only one though :) The apps aren't really "big" but we are a "big"
company using it.
On 4/23/08, Thiago Pojda <thiago.pojdasoftpartech.com.br> wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> I've been asked this common question: What big companies use PHP in big
> apps?
attached mail follows:
Thanks everyone for replying, I think those names can change someone's mind
;)
-----Mensagem original-----
De: mike [mailto:mike503gmail.com]
Enviada em: quarta-feira, 23 de abril de 2008 15:48
Para: Thiago Pojda
Cc: php-generallists.php.net
Assunto: Re: [PHP] Big companies that use PHP?
We're using it at Intel on a handful of sites... I think my team is
the only one though :) The apps aren't really "big" but we are a "big"
company using it.
On 4/23/08, Thiago Pojda <thiago.pojdasoftpartech.com.br> wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> I've been asked this common question: What big companies use PHP in big
> apps?
attached mail follows:
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 2:26 PM, Thiago Pojda <
thiago.pojdasoftpartech.com.br> wrote:
> Thanks everyone for replying, I think those names can change someone's mind
> ;)
i know where youre coming from; i recall a certain manager once saying to me
'php doesnt scale when it goes OO'. i wanted to take his head off, but
instead i mentioned wikipedia.
-nathan
attached mail follows:
---- Thiago Pojda <thiago.pojdasoftpartech.com.br> wrote:
> Thanks everyone for replying, I think those names can change someone's mind
> ;)
>
> -----Mensagem original-----
> De: mike [mailto:mike503gmail.com]
> Enviada em: quarta-feira, 23 de abril de 2008 15:48
> Para: Thiago Pojda
> Cc: php-generallists.php.net
> Assunto: Re: [PHP] Big companies that use PHP?
>
> We're using it at Intel on a handful of sites... I think my team is
> the only one though :) The apps aren't really "big" but we are a "big"
> company using it.
>
> On 4/23/08, Thiago Pojda <thiago.pojdasoftpartech.com.br> wrote:
> > Hey guys,
> >
> > I've been asked this common question: What big companies use PHP in big
> > apps?
IBM in case the manager needs another big name...
There's Java here too, but I don't see Ruby anywhere...
attached mail follows:
On Wed, 2008-04-23 at 16:54 -0400, Wolf wrote:
> ---- Thiago Pojda <thiago.pojdasoftpartech.com.br> wrote:
> > Thanks everyone for replying, I think those names can change someone's mind
> > ;)
> >
> > -----Mensagem original-----
> > De: mike [mailto:mike503gmail.com]
> > Enviada em: quarta-feira, 23 de abril de 2008 15:48
> > Para: Thiago Pojda
> > Cc: php-generallists.php.net
> > Assunto: Re: [PHP] Big companies that use PHP?
> >
> > We're using it at Intel on a handful of sites... I think my team is
> > the only one though :) The apps aren't really "big" but we are a "big"
> > company using it.
> >
> > On 4/23/08, Thiago Pojda <thiago.pojdasoftpartech.com.br> wrote:
> > > Hey guys,
> > >
> > > I've been asked this common question: What big companies use PHP in big
> > > apps?
>
> IBM in case the manager needs another big name...
>
> There's Java here too, but I don't see Ruby anywhere...
Ruby sucks... oh wait... where's Greg...
*ducks and runs away cackling*
;)
Cheers,
Rob.
--
http://www.interjinn.com
Application and Templating Framework for PHP
attached mail follows:
i have seen many php code. i learn php on my own, and during early days with
php,
i download many open source php project and try to learn the coding on my
own.
i did see many code (ugly, spaghetti code etc). Some even take me few
hours to figure out
how it works.
But one project using php in a very clean way. The codeis look so simple.
yet do so much thing.
Personally, i vote for www.eyeos.org project for the best php code. Anyone
know better?
attached mail follows:
On 4/23/08, paragasu <paragasugmail.com> wrote:
> But one project using php in a very clean way. The codeis look so simple.
> yet do so much thing.
> Personally, i vote for www.eyeos.org project for the best php code. Anyone
> know better?
Yes: mine.
:)
attached mail follows:
I work for a company that has chosen to use XML (Software AG Tamino XML
database) as its storage system for an enterprise application. We need to
make a system wide change to information within the database that isn't
feasible to do through our application's user interface. My solution was to
unload the XML collection in question, open it, manipulate it, then write it
back out. Problem is it's a 230+MB file and even with PHP's max mem set to
4096MB (of 8GB available to the system) SimpleXML claims to still run out of
memory. Can anyone recommend a better way for handling a large amount of XML
data? Thanks.
--
--Steve Gula
(this email address is used for list communications only, direct contact at
this email address is not guaranteed to be read)
attached mail follows:
On 4/23/08, Steve Gula <sg-listsstevegula.net> wrote:
>
> I work for a company that has chosen to use XML (Software AG Tamino XML
> database) as its storage system for an enterprise application. We need to
> make a system wide change to information within the database that isn't
> feasible to do through our application's user interface. My solution was
> to
> unload the XML collection in question, open it, manipulate it, then write
> it
> back out. Problem is it's a 230+MB file and even with PHP's max mem set to
> 4096MB (of 8GB available to the system) SimpleXML claims to still run out
> of
> memory. Can anyone recommend a better way for handling a large amount of
> XML
> data? Thanks.
>
> --
> --Steve Gula
>
> (this email address is used for list communications only, direct contact
> at
> this email address is not guaranteed to be read)
>
Can you chunk the data in any way, break it into smaller more managable
peices?
--
Bastien
Cat, the other other white meat
attached mail follows:
I could but it would make things very difficult. Some of the entities around
id # 100 could be affected by entities around id #11000 and would result in
a file needing to be manipulated at the same time. Unfortunately, I don't
think this is a top to bottom change for the information at hand.
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 4:36 PM, Bastien Koert <phpstergmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 4/23/08, Steve Gula <sg-listsstevegula.net> wrote:
> >
> > I work for a company that has chosen to use XML (Software AG Tamino XML
> > database) as its storage system for an enterprise application. We need
> > to
> > make a system wide change to information within the database that isn't
> > feasible to do through our application's user interface. My solution was
> > to
> > unload the XML collection in question, open it, manipulate it, then
> > write it
> > back out. Problem is it's a 230+MB file and even with PHP's max mem set
> > to
> > 4096MB (of 8GB available to the system) SimpleXML claims to still run
> > out of
> > memory. Can anyone recommend a better way for handling a large amount of
> > XML
> > data? Thanks.
> >
> > --
> > --Steve Gula
> >
> > (this email address is used for list communications only, direct contact
> > at
> > this email address is not guaranteed to be read)
> >
>
> Can you chunk the data in any way, break it into smaller more managable
> peices?
>
> --
>
> Bastien
>
> Cat, the other other white meat
--
--Steve Gula
(this email address is used for list communications only, direct contact at
this email address is not guaranteed to be read)
attached mail follows:
On 23 Apr 2008, at 21:41, Steve Gula wrote:
> I could but it would make things very difficult. Some of the
> entities around
> id # 100 could be affected by entities around id #11000 and would
> result in
> a file needing to be manipulated at the same time. Unfortunately, I
> don't
> think this is a top to bottom change for the information at hand.
Can you not do it with a text processor like sed? That would be a lot
easier than trying to do it with SimpleXML.
-Stut
--
http://stut.net/
> On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 4:36 PM, Bastien Koert <phpstergmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 4/23/08, Steve Gula <sg-listsstevegula.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> I work for a company that has chosen to use XML (Software AG
>>> Tamino XML
>>> database) as its storage system for an enterprise application. We
>>> need
>>> to
>>> make a system wide change to information within the database that
>>> isn't
>>> feasible to do through our application's user interface. My
>>> solution was
>>> to
>>> unload the XML collection in question, open it, manipulate it, then
>>> write it
>>> back out. Problem is it's a 230+MB file and even with PHP's max
>>> mem set
>>> to
>>> 4096MB (of 8GB available to the system) SimpleXML claims to still
>>> run
>>> out of
>>> memory. Can anyone recommend a better way for handling a large
>>> amount of
>>> XML
>>> data? Thanks.
>>>
>>> --
>>> --Steve Gula
>>>
>>> (this email address is used for list communications only, direct
>>> contact
>>> at
>>> this email address is not guaranteed to be read)
>>>
>>
>> Can you chunk the data in any way, break it into smaller more
>> managable
>> peices?
>>
>> --
>>
>> Bastien
>>
>> Cat, the other other white meat
>
>
>
>
> --
> --Steve Gula
>
> (this email address is used for list communications only, direct
> contact at
> this email address is not guaranteed to be read)
attached mail follows:
Hi,
How about expat with custom XML handlers? Should work even with an 32 MB
memory limit. It will just take some time ...
Have fun
Bastien Koert schrieb:
> On 4/23/08, Steve Gula <sg-listsstevegula.net> wrote:
>> I work for a company that has chosen to use XML (Software AG Tamino XML
>> database) as its storage system for an enterprise application. We need to
>> make a system wide change to information within the database that isn't
>> feasible to do through our application's user interface. My solution was
>> to
>> unload the XML collection in question, open it, manipulate it, then write
>> it
>> back out. Problem is it's a 230+MB file and even with PHP's max mem set to
>> 4096MB (of 8GB available to the system) SimpleXML claims to still run out
>> of
>> memory. Can anyone recommend a better way for handling a large amount of
>> XML
>> data? Thanks.
>>
>> --
>> --Steve Gula
>>
>> (this email address is used for list communications only, direct contact
>> at
>> this email address is not guaranteed to be read)
>>
>
> Can you chunk the data in any way, break it into smaller more managable
> peices?
>
attached mail follows:
In that case you may want to try XMLReader as it doesn't load all XML
into memory.
If that doesn't help that you will need to do custom parser
application for you need.
using XMLReader to read through whole XML chunking it with eg every
5000 items and storing those chunks on disk.
Than use SimpleXML to read and manipulate those chunks and save them
back to disk.
It would help if you can provide with XML mockup
eg.
<feed>
<item id='1'>
.......
</item>
<item id='2'>
.......
</item>
<item id='3'>
.......
</item>
....
<item id='278172'>
</item>
</feed>
<?php
//this will makes files xml-1.xml xml-2.xml etc
makeChunksWithXmlReader($pathToLargeXmlFile, CustomXmlManipulator::
$SPLITAT);
class CustomXmlManipulator{
static $SPLITAT = 5000;
function getXmlChunk($id){
return simplexml_load_file( $this-> getXmlFile($id) );
}
function storeXml($id,$simpleXmlObject){
$file = $this-> getXmlFile($id);
file_put_contents( $file , $simpleXmlObject->asXml() );
//free up the memory
$simpleXmlObject = null;
}
function getXmlFile($id){
$chunk = (int)($id / self::$SPLITAT) + 1;
return 'xml-' . $chunk .' .xml';
}
}
$XMLM = new CustomXmlManipulator();
$first = $XMLM-> getXmlChunk(1);
foreach ($first as $x){
....
.....
if(something){
//here you need to manipulate ID 23493
$tmpX = $XMLM-> getXmlChunk(23493);
$tmpX->.... = .....; //change XML
$XMLM->storeXml(23493, $tmpX);
}
}
?>
this is just a basic logic it can be extender further more, depending
on your needs.
function makeChunksWithXmlReader needs to go through a XML file
and make chunks on disk.
more on XMLReader http://www.php.net/manual/en/class.xmlreader.php
On Apr 23, 2008, at 10:41 PM, Steve Gula wrote:
> I could but it would make things very difficult. Some of the
> entities around
> id # 100 could be affected by entities around id #11000 and would
> result in
> a file needing to be manipulated at the same time. Unfortunately, I
> don't
> think this is a top to bottom change for the information at hand.
>
> On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 4:36 PM, Bastien Koert <phpstergmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 4/23/08, Steve Gula <sg-listsstevegula.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> I work for a company that has chosen to use XML (Software AG
>>> Tamino XML
>>> database) as its storage system for an enterprise application. We
>>> need
>>> to
>>> make a system wide change to information within the database that
>>> isn't
>>> feasible to do through our application's user interface. My
>>> solution was
>>> to
>>> unload the XML collection in question, open it, manipulate it, then
>>> write it
>>> back out. Problem is it's a 230+MB file and even with PHP's max
>>> mem set
>>> to
>>> 4096MB (of 8GB available to the system) SimpleXML claims to still
>>> run
>>> out of
>>> memory. Can anyone recommend a better way for handling a large
>>> amount of
>>> XML
>>> data? Thanks.
>>>
>>> --
>>> --Steve Gula
>>>
>>> (this email address is used for list communications only, direct
>>> contact
>>> at
>>> this email address is not guaranteed to be read)
>>>
>>
>> Can you chunk the data in any way, break it into smaller more
>> managable
>> peices?
>>
>> --
>>
>> Bastien
>>
>> Cat, the other other white meat
>
>
>
>
> --
> --Steve Gula
>
> (this email address is used for list communications only, direct
> contact at
> this email address is not guaranteed to be read)
Bojan Tesanovic
http://www.carster.us/
attached mail follows:
Hi - - - ---- - --
I have a typical setup -- my development machine, a testing server
and, of course, the production server. My development machine, of
course, doesn't have a Secure certificate, yet I need to be able to
test https pages here, before getting to the testing server.
(Currently, the testing server doesn't have one either, but that will
be remedied shortly.)
I know how to test for the existance of HTTPS, and stuff like that.
So: Can one test https on a local machine? Resources, anyone? I have
Googled my fingers off.
Environment: PHP 5.2.5
Win 2K
IIS 5
- or, if I need to -
Mac OS-X 10.4
Apache? (I haven't set up the Mac as a server)
- or -
Linux (Ubuntu) with Apache (I am moving this direction and haven't
yet learned how to run Apache)
Ken
attached mail follows:
Ken Kixmoeller wrote:
> Hi - - - ---- - --
>
> I have a typical setup -- my development machine, a testing server and,
> of course, the production server. My development machine, of course,
> doesn't have a Secure certificate, yet I need to be able to test https
> pages here, before getting to the testing server. (Currently, the
> testing server doesn't have one either, but that will be remedied shortly.)
>
> I know how to test for the existance of HTTPS, and stuff like that.
>
> So: Can one test https on a local machine? Resources, anyone? I have
> Googled my fingers off.
>
> Environment: PHP 5.2.5
> Win 2K
> IIS 5
>
> - or, if I need to -
>
> Mac OS-X 10.4
> Apache? (I haven't set up the Mac as a server)
>
> - or -
>
> Linux (Ubuntu) with Apache (I am moving this direction and haven't yet
> learned how to run Apache)
>
> Ken
Why not just generate a free self-signed certificate for use on the dev
server or workstation?
-Shawn
attached mail follows:
just use a self-signed cert.
there should be a lot of examples out there for that.
On 4/23/08, Ken Kixmoeller <Kixjaguarcomcast.net> wrote:
> Hi - - - ---- - --
>
> I have a typical setup -- my development machine, a testing server and, of
> course, the production server. My development machine, of course, doesn't
> have a Secure certificate, yet I need to be able to test https pages here,
> before getting to the testing server. (Currently, the testing server doesn't
> have one either, but that will be remedied shortly.)
>
> I know how to test for the existance of HTTPS, and stuff like that.
>
> So: Can one test https on a local machine? Resources, anyone? I have Googled
> my fingers off.
>
> Environment: PHP 5.2.5
> Win 2K
> IIS 5
>
> - or, if I need to -
>
> Mac OS-X 10.4
> Apache? (I haven't set up the Mac as a server)
>
> - or -
>
> Linux (Ubuntu) with Apache (I am moving this direction and haven't yet
> learned how to run Apache)
>
> Ken
>
> --
> PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>
attached mail follows:
On Apr 23, 2008, at 4:53 PM, Shawn McKenzie wrote:
> Ken Kixmoeller wrote:
>>
>> I know how to test for the existance of HTTPS, and stuff like that.
>> So: Can one test https on a local machine? Resources, anyone? I
>> have Googled my fingers off.
>>
> Why not just generate a free self-signed certificate for use on the
> dev server or workstation?
>
Thanks, Shawn & Mike --
I'll research that. Many thanks...
Ken
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]