[csw-users] problem with php5

[pjama]

pjama wrote:
> Hi,
> I've recently migrated my csw driven webserver from solaris 10 on sparc 
> to solaris 10 on x86. The sparc was built some time back using the pre 
> blastwave split (I think) packages for Apache, php, mysql, etc.
> 
> My web site runs egroupware that ran fine under the old 
> packages/platform but has some issues under the new platform which I 
> think are PHP related.
> 
> I've posted the issues on egroupware lists for assistance but it's been 
> limited with the invitation to buy commercial support.
> The posting is detailed here:
> http://www.nabble.com/egroupware-edits-broken-after-migration-td24407308s3741.html#a24427312 
> 
> 
> To sumaraise:
> CSWapache2 installed and configured, minor upgrade from 2.2.6 to current 
> 2.2.11. Confige files copied over and slightly adjusted.
> Mysql remains 5.0.51, database exported, re-imported on new server. The 
> egroupware content was migrated as is (ie working copy)
> 
> PHP 5 seems to have undergone the most significant change with version 
> 5.2.4 to changed from 5.2.9 but libraries are now shared. In the process 
>  of trying to troubleshoot AFAIK I've installed all the modules except 
> the unwanted database ones. "php -i" now seems to be comparable between 
> old and new servers.
> 
> The problem *seems* to be that apache/php is not loading some of the 
> functions in files of files per say from egroupware.
> 
> I'm after any assistance on how to pinpoint the problem.
> 
> Cheers
> P
> 
> 
> 
I've reverted to php5 version 5.2.4 from opencsw stable and my issue is 
resolved.

I did a pkgrm of all things CSWphp5* and pkgutil -i of php5 and friends 
from stable. Not the best solution because of dependencies but it works ATM.

I guess the question is: Is it that egroupware is not compatible with 
5.2.9 or is there some configuration difference between php 5.2.9 and 
5.2.4 at compile/install/configure time? I've posed this question in the 
egroupware forum so we'll see where it progresses.

Cheers
P



-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.