Everything
php
Learn Community Releases The PHP Project
Home » Project » Newsgroups » php.internals » Releasing 4.3.5pl1 »

Releasing 4.3.5pl1

php.internals

Andi Gutmans

22 years ago
Hi, A pretty serious bug crept into 4.3.5. A few weeks ago, a TSRM fix was commited which was supposed to prevent memory leaks when PHP ends its execution (shutdown dtor was not being called in tsrm_shutdown()). This fix causes a crash when a shared extension registers a dtor function. This is because the dtor is called after the extension is unloaded. Stas has commited a patch to TSRM which prevents the dtor call for now, which isn't very important because besides giving a warm fuzzy feeling, it's right before PHP shuts down and thus, memory leaks aren't important anyway. On a side note the per-thread dtor is still called, thus, eliminating leaks when threads are created/destroyed in multi-threaded servers. I suggest we release 4.3.5pl1 with just this bug fix within the next couple of days as this is a crash bug which can happen on any MT server or MT-safe PHP builds (such as Windows CGI). Andi

Edin Kadribasic

22 years ago
+1 except I would call it 4.3.6. We have precedent for this sort bug fix release. 4.3.1 if I remember correctly. There were many bug reports regarding some data/time functions, maybe we should merge that fix in as well? Rasmus/Derick should know more about this one,. Edin On Thursday 01 April 2004 14:41, Andi Gutmans wrote:

Ilia A.

22 years ago
On April 1, 2004 07:51 am, Edin Kadribasic wrote:
> +1 except I would call it 4.3.6. We have precedent for this sort bug fix > release. 4.3.1 if I remember correctly.
+1
> There were many bug reports regarding some data/time functions, maybe we > should merge that fix in as well? Rasmus/Derick should know more about this > one,.
If we decide to make 4.3.6 I think we should include this fix as well, as it affects a fairly large number of users as well. Ilia

Rasmus Lerdorf

22 years ago
On Thu, 1 Apr 2004, Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
> On April 1, 2004 07:51 am, Edin Kadribasic wrote: > > +1 except I would call it 4.3.6. We have precedent for this sort bug fix > > release. 4.3.1 if I remember correctly. > > +1 > > > There were many bug reports regarding some data/time functions, maybe we > > should merge that fix in as well? Rasmus/Derick should know more about this > > one,. > > If we decide to make 4.3.6 I think we should include this fix as well, as it > affects a fairly large number of users as well.
Yup, given the fact that the DST change date is fast approaching, it would be good to get the mktime/gmmktime fixes out there soon along with the strftime fix. Nothing says we have to wait until we have 100+ bug fixes in there. We have fixed 20 or so bugs since 4.3.5 and I see nothing wrong with pushing out a 4.3.6 with these 20 fixes now. -Rasmus

Ilia A.

22 years ago
On April 1, 2004 12:05 pm, you wrote:
> Yup, given the fact that the DST change date is fast approaching, it would > be good to get the mktime/gmmktime fixes out there soon along with the > strftime fix. Nothing says we have to wait until we have 100+ bug fixes > in there. We have fixed 20 or so bugs since 4.3.5 and I see nothing wrong > with pushing out a 4.3.6 with these 20 fixes now.
While, some fixes are fairly safe, others may raise issues we had not considered (ex. fix for bug #27782). if we are making a quick release without a prior testing (RC) process I'd prefer to have only the absolutely necessary fixes such as DST & TSRM. Ilia

Rasmus Lerdorf

22 years ago
On Thu, 1 Apr 2004, Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
> On April 1, 2004 12:05 pm, you wrote: > > Yup, given the fact that the DST change date is fast approaching, it would > > be good to get the mktime/gmmktime fixes out there soon along with the > > strftime fix. Nothing says we have to wait until we have 100+ bug fixes > > in there. We have fixed 20 or so bugs since 4.3.5 and I see nothing wrong > > with pushing out a 4.3.6 with these 20 fixes now. > > While, some fixes are fairly safe, others may raise issues we had not > considered (ex. fix for bug #27782). if we are making a quick release without > a prior testing (RC) process I'd prefer to have only the absolutely necessary > fixes such as DST & TSRM.
I don't think we should push it out without an RC. I just think we should instigate the RC process now rather than waiting. Especially considering the fact that there were some non-trivial changes. The more other changes we add on top of these, the more time we will need for RC. -Rasmus

Andrei Zmievski

22 years ago
On Thu, 01 Apr 2004, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> I don't think we should push it out without an RC. I just think we should > instigate the RC process now rather than waiting. Especially considering > the fact that there were some non-trivial changes. The more other changes > we add on top of these, the more time we will need for RC.
+1 from me on this.. - Andrei

Ilia A.

22 years ago
On April 1, 2004 12:25 pm, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> I don't think we should push it out without an RC. I just think we should > instigate the RC process now rather than waiting. Especially considering > the fact that there were some non-trivial changes. The more other changes > we add on top of these, the more time we will need for RC.
As long as we have RC, +1 from me as well. Ilia

Andi Gutmans

22 years ago
I'm OK with RC and 4.3.6 but we should get it out quickly which means we should RC ASAP. How much time until the DST issues are fixed? I haven't seen any other problematic patches except for Ilia's latest Zend Engine patch which I didn't get a chance to review first. Andi At 12:44 PM 4/1/2004 -0500, Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:

Derick Rethans

22 years ago
On Thu, 1 Apr 2004, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> I'm OK with RC and 4.3.6 but we should get it out quickly which means we > should RC ASAP. How much time until the DST issues are fixed?
If all goes well in a couple of hours. Derick

Rasmus Lerdorf

22 years ago
On Thu, 1 Apr 2004, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> I'm OK with RC and 4.3.6 but we should get it out quickly which means we > should RC ASAP. How much time until the DST issues are fixed? I haven't > seen any other problematic patches except for Ilia's latest Zend Engine > patch which I didn't get a chance to review first.
The mktime/gmmktime fixes have been in there for a couple of days. I think Derick has a strftime() fix in the works. The mktime stuff is a bit more important as that was something which was broken between 4.3.4 and 4.3.5 while the strftime one has been around forever. -Rasmus

Andi Gutmans

22 years ago
At 10:28 AM 4/1/2004 -0800, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
>On Thu, 1 Apr 2004, Andi Gutmans wrote: > > I'm OK with RC and 4.3.6 but we should get it out quickly which means we > > should RC ASAP. How much time until the DST issues are fixed? I haven't > > seen any other problematic patches except for Ilia's latest Zend Engine > > patch which I didn't get a chance to review first. > >The mktime/gmmktime fixes have been in there for a couple of days. I >think Derick has a strftime() fix in the works. The mktime stuff is a bit >more important as that was something which was broken between 4.3.4 and >4.3.5 while the strftime one has been around forever.
OK guys. So give a heads-up when it's ready and I'll roll 4.3.6RC1. Andi

Derick Rethans

22 years ago
On Thu, 1 Apr 2004, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Apr 2004, Ilia Alshanetsky wrote: > > > On April 1, 2004 07:51 am, Edin Kadribasic wrote: > > > +1 except I would call it 4.3.6. We have precedent for this sort bug fix > > > release. 4.3.1 if I remember correctly. > > > > +1 > > > > > There were many bug reports regarding some data/time functions, maybe we > > > should merge that fix in as well? Rasmus/Derick should know more about this > > > one,. > > > > If we decide to make 4.3.6 I think we should include this fix as well, as it > > affects a fairly large number of users as well. > > Yup, given the fact that the DST change date is fast approaching, it would
It did already change in Europe, and I'm on the bug now. Should be fixed tonight.
> be good to get the mktime/gmmktime fixes out there soon along with the > strftime fix. Nothing says we have to wait until we have 100+ bug fixes > in there. We have fixed 20 or so bugs since 4.3.5 and I see nothing wrong > with pushing out a 4.3.6 with these 20 fixes now.
Me neither, the more changes creep in the more we need an RC for this. regards, Derick