On 26.5.2011, at 21:02, Clint Byrum <cl...@ubuntu.com> wrote: > Excerpts from Ondřej Surý's message of Thu May 26 08:57:57 -0700 2011: >> On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 19:23, Clint Byrum <cl...@ubuntu.com> wrote: >>> Package: php5 >>> Version: 5.3.5-1 >>> Severity: normal >>> Tags: patch >>> User: ubuntu-de...@lists.ubuntu.com >>> Usertags: origin-ubuntu oneiric ubuntu-patch >>> >>> >>> Forwarded from Ubuntu: >>> >>> https://launchpad.net/bugs/634359 >>> >>> In Ubuntu, the attached patch was applied to achieve the following: >>> >>> Binary package hint: php-pear >>> >>> Quoting from the bug report: >>>> Most of PECL packages require /usr/bin/phpize and some other php5-dev >>>> files to get installed/compiled (i.e. pecl/fribidi), but php5-dev is >>>> not always installed. >> >> Are there any PECL packages which don't require php5-dev? The most >> elegant solution would be to move /usr/bin/pecl to php5-dev and maybe >> add some note about missing php5-dev when installing PECL package via >> pear install. >> >> Or what about adding those two prints to PEAR/Builder.php: >> >> $err = $this->_runCommand($this->config->get('php_prefix') >> . "phpize" . >> $this->config->get('php_suffix'), >> array(&$this, 'phpizeCallback')); >> if (PEAR::isError($err)) { >> return $err; >> } >> >> if (!$err) { >> print "If the command failed with 'phpize: not found' then >> you need to install php5-dev package"; >> print "You can do it by running 'apt-get install php5-dev' >> as a root user"; >> return $this->raiseError("`phpize' failed"); >> } >> >> This seems less intrusive then installing php5-dev for all php-pear users. >> >> What do you think? >> > > Interesting idea. I do like the idea of allowing sysadmins to keep the > number of -dev packages to a minimum on production systems. The reason > pecl is being considered as a runtime command and not -dev I think is > because its for installing stuff that isn't available as a .deb, so > its most likely use case is on a runtime host, but one that probably > doesn't mind keeping php5-dev installed, or that will install it just > to get the .so and then can remove it without removing all of PEAR. > > I like it, and I'd drop the Ubuntu change upon the one you specify above > being made in Debian.
The message is there, I'll do the move of pecl command in next commit, it will probably also need some description change. Another idea which I am just thinking is to create php-pear-dev package which would include the pecl command and dependency on php5-dev, but that may be too much... > One thing, how about after these changes, php-pear adds a > Recommends: php5-dev, so that the casual user will still obtain the > functionality. This would also help Ubuntu users who already have the > Depends: line not be surprised when they install php-pear and expect > pecl to work. The problem is that php5-dev draws full build tool chain as a dependency including autotools, libssl-dev and all it's dependencies, so I don't like this idea very much. O. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
