[50191] trunk/dports/php/php5-eaccelerator/Portfile

[Ryan Schmidt]

On May 6, 2009, at 11:21, Olivier Le Floch wrote:

> On 1 mai 09, at 00:26, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>
>> On Apr 30, 2009, at 01:28, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>>
>>> On Apr 27, 2009, at 09:29, alakazam at macports.org wrote:
>>>
>>>> Revision: 50191
>>>>          http://trac.macports.org/changeset/50191
>>>> Author:   alakazam at macports.org
>>>> Date:     2009-04-27 07:29:29 -0700 (Mon, 27 Apr 2009)
>>>> Log Message:
>>>> -----------
>>>> Migrate php5-eaccelerator to the php5extension PortGroup
>>>
>>> Did you try whether the port still works? I haven't tried it yet  
>>> but I didn't think this would work because eAccelerator is not a  
>>> normal PHP extension but a Zend extension and therefore needs to  
>>> be loaded with the zend_extension directive and not the extension  
>>> directive. I was going to add an option to the php5extension  
>>> portgroup to allow you to specify what type of extension it is so  
>>> that the correct directive can be written to the .ini file.
>
> I had tried it and it worked (if I'm not mistaken), but had  
> forgotten about this distinction.
>
>> Ok, it looks like eAccelerator is unique in that it can be used as  
>> either a Zend extension or as a regular extension, which is why it  
>> still works with the portgroup:
>
> Lucky me :p
>
>> http://eaccelerator.net/wiki/ 
>> InstallFromSource#Step3.ConfiguringeAccelerator
>>
>> But I can't tell which method is preferred or why.
>
> I think using it as a regular PHP extension is better for stability  
> reasons :
>
>> http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=42002#c128772
>
> But I really can't find anything more regarding this issue...

That ticket doesn't seem to have reached a meaningful conclusion...  
"No feedback"...

My research suggests that a zend extension would perform faster, but  
that some zend extensions cannot be used with other zend extensions,  
so it would be more compatible to load eAccelerator as a php  
extension to avoid that issue.

Maybe on ports that can be loaded either as a zend extension or as a  
php extension, we should be providing variants to allow the user to  
choose? with php extension being the default? Though I'm inclined to  
do nothing, and just leave it as a php extension, until someone  
complains.

The php5extension portgroup now allows you to specify that an  
extension should be loaded as a zend extension. The only port  
currently using this is php5-xdebug (it cannot be loaded as a php  
extension).