php.net |  support |  documentation |  report a bug |  advanced search |  search howto |  statistics |  random bug |  login

go to bug id or search bugs for

Bug #18650 4.2.2CVS requires > Apache 2.0.40
Submitted: 2002-07-30 10:07 UTC Modified: 2002-07-30 11:37 UTC
From: mclinden at informed dot net Assigned:
Status: Not a bug Package: Compile Failure
PHP Version: 4CVS-2002-07-30 OS: Linux
Private report: No CVE-ID: None
View Developer Edit
Welcome! If you don't have a Git account, you can't do anything here.
If you reported this bug, you can edit this bug over here.
(description)
Block user comment
Status: Assign to:
Package:
Bug Type:
Summary:
From: mclinden at informed dot net
New email:
PHP Version: OS:

 

 [2002-07-30 10:07 UTC] mclinden at informed dot net 
Attempting to compile the latest CVS results in a error that the version of Apache must be equal to or greater than 2.0.40 (which is still in development).

Is this correct? The reason I ask is that the CVS fixes other problems with Apache 2.0 compiles (including the infamous AP_MODULE_MAGIC_AT_LEAST).

Thanks in advance.

Patches

Pull Requests

History

AllCommentsChangesGit/SVN commitsRelated reports
 [2002-07-30 10:27 UTC] edink@php.net 
Yes that is correct. If you need to compile PHP with Apache 2.0.39 use -STABLE snapshot or checkout PHP_4_2_0 branch from the cvs repository.
 [2002-07-30 10:27 UTC] cynic@php.net 
if it says it's required then it's required.
 [2002-07-30 10:35 UTC] mclinden at informed dot net 
You miss my point. 4.2.2 is required to fix security problems with the prior 4.x releases. The CVS (NOT the TARBALL) is required to fix a bug in sapi/apache2filter/php_functions.c. But the CVS does not compile with a production version of Apache.

Your comment "if it says it's required then it's required" is a senseless waste of bandwidth. Either the tarball should be fixed to compile with Apache 2.0.39 or the CVS should not require 2.0.40.
 [2002-07-30 10:41 UTC] cynic@php.net 
you can see signs saying "apache 2.0 support is *EXPERIMENTAL*" all over the place.
 [2002-07-30 10:50 UTC] mclinden at informed dot net 
I fully realize that Apache 2.0 support is *experimental* (though 2.0 development has been going on long enough that there was ample time to prepare). But 4.2.0 and 4.2.1 actually compiled under Apache 2.0 and worked.

4.2.2 is, essentially, a *required* upgrade, even for experimenters and developers. The fix to sapi/apache2filter/php_functions.c is trivial but the excuse given by the developers was that there was a "rush" to get 4.2.2 out and the "fix" is in the CVS not the tarball. Fine. But the CVS breaks other things.

I didn't ask or expect to compile the CVS but at the very least, fix the silly tarball.

After all, you can also fly experimental aircraft with known risks but if your sure it is gonna crash out of the box you'd be stupid to try it. And the willingness of end users to try the experimental versions is how you find bugs.

Comprenez?
 [2002-07-30 11:37 UTC] rasmus@php.net 
There are all sorts of problems with Apache2 and PHP in the 4.2.0 code.  It is probably for the better that it doesn't compile.  Nobody should be using this stuff for anything real at this point.  PHP CVS + Apache CVS is a bit better, so I have absolutely no problem not having this combination compile.
 
PHP Copyright © 2001-2026 The PHP Group
All rights reserved. 		Last updated: Wed Oct 07 13:00:02 2026 UTC