Well, you are wrong. Rasmus on Slashdot does actually == Rasmus from PHP devel.
The note you quoted from Bruce was written in July. He says right there that we agreed to fix those issues back in July. Being September now, that has obviously been done. And they were just slight wording changes.
As for your CGI thing. You are being silly. You quoted a CERT advisory from 1996. Being September 1999, that has obviously been addressed as well.
You are misinformed here. PHP 4 is very much Open Source and it has been run by Bruce Perens. The Zend component is under the QPL which has been deemed to be Open Source compliant and the rest of PHP is under an Apache/BSD style license.
And your cgi concerns aren't too well-founded. The thing you can do with the cgi version, at least under Unix, is to run it as your own user id through suExec which is quite safe. Under NT, who knows, but then I don't think IIS has.htaccess files anyway.
Also, ODBC support is not new to PHP 4. It was in PHP 3 as well and it hasn't changed much.
And finally, PHP 4 has an ISAPI version coming so from a performance perspective it should be quite competitive, and most likely quicker than CF on NT.
FreeBSD is Apache's main development platform? I don't know where you got that from. It's not like the Apache developers sit huddled around a single box and develop in a dark room. I don't think fbsd is the prevalent platform among Apache developers.
I re-confirmed interest in both my etrade and my affinity program shares this morning. I have yet to see any shares show up in my account. The broker said that they would be purchased and show up in my account sometime today and he couldn't tell me how many. Sounds very odd to me that I would get them after the shares started trading.
Personally I think code and technology has had the most profound impact on the Internet. ARPA, UUCP, BGP, bind, sendmail, Mosaic, Netscape, Apache, etc. Papers come after the fact and tend to talk about stuff already there. Remove one of the above pieces of technology and the Internet would be very different today. Remove most of the papers people might come up with and I doubt things would be all that different.
No, we have no intentions of dropping the GD-support in PHP. PHP has absolutely no LZW, GIF nor libgd code in it. All it has are a set of access functions. If you have libgd.a and the gd include files on your system, PHP will work. We don't care how you get these files and nobody can come after us for anything because we don't distribute them.
Well, IBM is also pouring resources into developing Apache 2.0. That is bound to benefit a whole lot of people. I can't think of an example where they are just leeching free development in the open source community. The things I have seen so far form IBM has been them giving out code.
And heck, they hired me...;) But, I in no way speak on their behalf. I haven't really even started working there yet, so I don't know anything.
I personally wear denim bib overalls to IBM from time to time. T-shirts are the rule. I am not even involved in the Apache group though we do share some bundling in common.
Good thing too, since I will be there soon and it would take 1000 heavily armed men to get me to wear a suit and tie.
-Rasmus
linuxnewbie.org not using Linux?
on
Linuxnewbie.org
·
· Score: 1
It's kind of weird for a Linux oriented site not to run Linux. This one appears to be running Irix.
Rob, is it individual httpd's crashing, or is the main root-owned process disappearing on you? Regardless, try attaching gdb to one of your processes and see what happens when it goes down. You may be able to catch a seg fault or a bus error and then get a backtrace to get some idea of where things are going wrong.
I wrote an article for the May issue of WebTechniques on PHP + LDAP. It walks you through how to build a web interface for an LDAP directory. Look for it.
Hey, no need to apologize to me.;) This whole Application Server buzzword is rather confusing. There are so many companies pitching wildly different products and labelling them all "Application Servers" that it can get really confusing to the customer, I think.
Calling both PHP and WebSphere Application Servers and comparing them directly is not appropriate at all. WebSphere includes a whole collection of tools while PHP is just one building block that people could potentially use to roll their own Application Server environment. Heck, with a bit of fiddling I bet one could even use PHP as a WebSphere component.
Just to clarify, I am in no way knocking WebSphere here. I actually think it is pretty cool. Different people have different needs and requirements when it comes to application servers. Sometimes you don't need all the features of a WebSphere and something like PHP fits perfectly. Heck, sometimes a simple Bourne shell CGI script is the right approach.
Those are all components that can be added to a system and does not really define an application server environment. At the root of it, you have an application that does something and serves up a result. Apache+PHP or Apache+mod_perl do this and as such are technically application servers.
Load balancing is probably best done through something like a Cisco Local Director in front of the server which would cross over into fault tolerance when combined with something like back-to-back Netapp 740 filers. Distributed session management can be done easily with both PHP and mod_perl as well. Just a matter of deciding where to store your sessions. Most likely in a central database and have each server fetch the session state from that central db. With two-phase commits you are getting into database functionality which isn't really directly related to the application language you choose. db connection pooling is possible with mod_perl and not quite there with PHP, although you do get persistent db connections which is usually what you want anyway. Thread pooling? Well, yeah, I guess. Apache isn't threaded, so that's a little hard, but as Alex mentioned, when PHP is used with the fhttpd server you get that functionality. Template interpretation is a given, remote manageability as well. Heck, it's Unix. Result cacheing is easy to do as well in a slew of different ways including shared memory plus much much more.
Granted, this stuff isn't packaged up in a nice and shiny box and handed to you on a plate. You might have to think a little bit and decide what the best approach is, but that doesn't mean it cannot be used to do the job. There are literally hundreds of thousands of sites that think it does.
Your guess is ok. PHP can be considered an application server as well.
Why you would want a netwinder instead
on
Qube2 Release
·
· Score: 1
I don't find it that bad. You can stick an entire recovery filesystem in flash and run completely from flash while you fix your problem. Or, as I do here, simply NFS-mount your root file system from somewhere else. You can of course also load your kernel remotely via tftp. And, a third option is to use a Syquest or Iomega parallel port drive. I use a Syquest EZ-Flyer 230 here and it works nicely. I find all of these solutions more powerful and flexible than your traditional floppy solution. On a traditional x86 box you don't have built-in support for tftp and dhcp and such right in the firmware. You have to construct a floppy with the right magic to revive a system. With a Netwinder you can plug it into a ethernet, turn it on and you are set even if your HD has been completely blown away.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, you are wrong. Rasmus on Slashdot does actually == Rasmus from PHP devel.
The note you quoted from Bruce was written in July. He says right there that we agreed to fix those issues back in July. Being September now, that has obviously been done. And they were just slight wording changes.
As for your CGI thing. You are being silly. You quoted a CERT advisory from 1996. Being September 1999, that has obviously been addressed as well.
-Rasmus
You are misinformed here. PHP 4 is very much Open Source and it has been run by Bruce Perens. The Zend component is under the QPL which has been deemed to be Open Source compliant and the rest of PHP is under an Apache/BSD style license.
.htaccess files anyway.
And your cgi concerns aren't too well-founded. The thing you can do with the cgi version, at least under Unix, is to run it as your own user id through suExec which is quite safe. Under NT, who knows, but then I don't think IIS has
Also, ODBC support is not new to PHP 4. It was in PHP 3 as well and it hasn't changed much.
And finally, PHP 4 has an ISAPI version coming so from a performance perspective it should be quite competitive, and most likely quicker than CF on NT.
-Rasmus
FreeBSD is Apache's main development platform? I don't know where you got that from. It's not like the Apache developers sit huddled around a single box and develop in a dark room. I don't think fbsd is the prevalent platform among Apache developers.
Of course you don't. Moderators, please remove this crap, and people, don't listen to this guy.
I re-confirmed interest in both my etrade and my affinity program shares this morning. I have yet to see any shares show up in my account. The broker said that they would be purchased and show up in my account sometime today and he couldn't tell me how many. Sounds very odd to me that I would get them after the shares started trading.
I got both the email alert and the online Alert. This was after I had already re-indicated my interest though.
Personally I think code and technology has had the most profound impact on the Internet. ARPA, UUCP, BGP, bind, sendmail, Mosaic, Netscape, Apache, etc. Papers come after the fact and tend to talk about stuff already there. Remove one of the above pieces of technology and the Internet would be very different today. Remove most of the papers people might come up with and I doubt things would be all that different.
No, we have no intentions of dropping the GD-support in PHP. PHP has absolutely no LZW, GIF nor libgd code in it. All it has are a set of access functions. If you have libgd.a and the gd include files on your system, PHP will work. We don't care how you get these files and nobody can come after us for anything because we don't distribute them.
Well, IBM is also pouring resources into developing Apache 2.0. That is bound to benefit a whole lot of people. I can't think of an example where they are just leeching free development in the open source community. The things I have seen so far form IBM has been them giving out code.
;) But, I in no way speak on their behalf. I haven't really even started working there yet, so I don't know anything.
And heck, they hired me...
-Rasmus
Good thing too, since I will be there soon and it would take 1000 heavily armed men to get me to wear a suit and tie.
-Rasmus
It's kind of weird for a Linux oriented site not to run Linux. This one appears to be running Irix.
Rob, is it individual httpd's crashing, or is the main root-owned process disappearing on you? Regardless, try attaching gdb to one of your processes and see what happens when it goes down.
You may be able to catch a seg fault or a bus error and then get a backtrace to get some idea of where things are going wrong.
I wrote an article for the May issue of WebTechniques on PHP + LDAP. It walks you through how to build a web interface for an LDAP directory. Look for it.
-Rasmus
Hey, no need to apologize to me. ;) This whole Application Server buzzword is rather confusing. There are so many companies pitching wildly different products and labelling them all "Application Servers" that it can get really confusing to the customer, I think.
Calling both PHP and WebSphere Application Servers and comparing them directly is not appropriate at all. WebSphere includes a whole collection of tools while PHP is just one building block that people could potentially use to roll their own Application Server environment. Heck, with a bit of fiddling I bet one could even use PHP as a WebSphere component.
Just to clarify, I am in no way knocking WebSphere here. I actually think it is pretty cool. Different people have different needs and requirements when it comes to application servers. Sometimes you don't need all the features of a WebSphere and something like PHP fits perfectly. Heck, sometimes a simple Bourne shell CGI script is the right approach.
-Rasmus
Those are all components that can be added to a system and does not really define an application server environment. At the root of it, you have an application that does something and serves up a result. Apache+PHP or Apache+mod_perl do this and as such are technically application servers.
Load balancing is probably best done through something like a Cisco Local Director in front of the server which would cross over into fault tolerance when combined with something like back-to-back Netapp 740 filers. Distributed session management can be done easily with both PHP and mod_perl as well. Just a matter of deciding where to store your sessions. Most likely in a central database and have each server fetch the session state from that central db. With two-phase commits you are getting into database functionality which isn't really directly related to the application language you choose. db connection pooling is possible with mod_perl and not quite there with PHP, although you do get persistent db connections which is usually what you want anyway. Thread pooling? Well, yeah, I guess. Apache isn't threaded, so that's a little hard, but as Alex mentioned, when PHP is used with the fhttpd server you get that functionality. Template interpretation is a given, remote manageability as well. Heck, it's Unix. Result cacheing is easy to do as well in a slew of different ways including shared memory plus much much more.
Granted, this stuff isn't packaged up in a nice and shiny box and handed to you on a plate. You might have to think a little bit and decide what the best approach is, but that doesn't mean it cannot be used to do the job. There are literally hundreds of thousands of sites that think it does.
-Rasmus
Your guess is ok. PHP can be considered an application server as well.
I don't find it that bad. You can stick an entire recovery filesystem in flash and run completely from flash while you fix your problem. Or, as I do here, simply NFS-mount your root file system from somewhere else. You can of course also load your kernel remotely via tftp. And, a third option is to use a Syquest or Iomega parallel port drive. I use a Syquest EZ-Flyer 230 here and it works nicely. I find all of these solutions more powerful and flexible than your traditional floppy solution. On a traditional x86 box you don't have built-in support for tftp and dhcp and such right in the firmware. You have to construct a floppy with the right magic to revive a system. With a Netwinder you can plug it into a ethernet, turn it on and you are set even if your HD has been completely blown away.
-Rasmus