Hello, When taking a look at the ebuild file, it has a variable USE_PHP that no longer has PHP5-3 target: USE_PHP="php5-5 php5-4" Big question is why does it have to use USE_PHP variable if there is PHP_TARGETS in make.conf? It doesn't seem logical to me to ignore the system-wide setting for PHP targets. Andrejs Reproducible: Always
(In reply to Andrejs Eigus from comment #0) > Hello, > > When taking a look at the ebuild file, it has a variable USE_PHP that no > longer has PHP5-3 target: > > USE_PHP="php5-5 php5-4" Maybe the ebuild you looked at supports only _these_ dev-lang/php branches and not 5.3? 3.0.1-r1 and 3.1.0_rc2 still appear to support dev-lang/php:5.3 though. > Big question is why does it have to use USE_PHP variable if there is > PHP_TARGETS in make.conf? It doesn't seem logical to me to ignore the > system-wide setting for PHP targets. It inherits php-ext-pecl-r2.eclass which inherits php-ext-source-r2.eclass which accepts the USE_PHP variable set in ebuilds. This has nothing to do with PHP_TARGETS which gets exposed in USE expansion.
Sorry, I meant pecl-imagick-3.2.0_rc1.ebuild -- being the latest? $ more /usr/portage/dev-php/pecl-imagick/pecl-imagick-3.2.0_rc1.ebuild # Copyright 1999-2013 Gentoo Foundation # Distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License v2 # $Header: /var/cvsroot/gentoo-x86/dev-php/pecl-imagick/pecl-imagick-3.2.0_rc1.e build,v 1.1 2013/12/09 21:52:46 mabi Exp $ EAPI=5 DOCS="TODO" MY_PV="${PV/rc/RC}" USE_PHP="php5-5 php5-4" inherit php-ext-pecl-r2 KEYWORDS="~amd64 ~x86" DESCRIPTION="PHP wrapper for the ImageMagick library." LICENSE="PHP-3.01" SLOT="0" IUSE="examples" DEPEND=">=media-gfx/imagemagick-6.2.4" RDEPEND="${DEPEND}" my_conf="--with-imagick=/usr"
(In reply to Andrejs Eigus from comment #0) > Hello, > > When taking a look at the ebuild file, it has a variable USE_PHP that no > longer has PHP5-3 target: > > USE_PHP="php5-5 php5-4" > This is intentional. php 5.3 will be masked soon. Time to upgrade :)
Easy to say. Almost feels like an insult. Have you personally migrated any large sites with old code from 5.3 to 5.5? We have, and it takes a lot of time and a great deal of concentration to solve all the issues. Take a look at the long list of "Few incompatibilities" in version 5.4, for example. I know that PHP 5.3 has been out there for a while now, but masking it already is IMHO quite unwise. Andrejs
(In reply to Andrejs Eigus from comment #4) > Easy to say. Almost feels like an insult. Have you personally migrated any > large sites with old code from 5.3 to 5.5? We have, and it takes a lot of > time and a great deal of concentration to solve all the issues. Take a look > at the long list of "Few incompatibilities" in version 5.4, for example. > I have been part of planning and executing several of those, actually. And yes, it takes time and effort, which is why you _at the latest_ start such an initiative when EOL of a version is announced. Hoping that a distro carries on a version indefinitely is ... not that wise. Especially a distro such as Gentoo that gives no guarantees of the availability of older versions. > I know that PHP 5.3 has been out there for a while now, but masking it > already is IMHO quite unwise. That is your opinion. My opinion is that keeping old, unmaintained versions in the tree is unwise. Plus we do not have the resources to maintain another minor version as the PHP 5.6 release cycle is about to start.
