Skip to content

Fix building packaged PHP extension - #9727

Merged
mkruskal-google merged 2 commits into
protocolbuffers:mainfrom
mlocati-forks:build-packaged-php-extension
Apr 5, 2022
Merged

mkruskal-google merged 2 commits into
protocolbuffers:mainfrom
mlocati-forks:build-packaged-php-extension

Conversation

@mlocati

@mlocati mlocati commented Apr 3, 2022 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

We've recently had a couple of issues that prevented the PHP extension from being installed with pecl (see #9654 and #9724).

So, what about adding a GitHub Action that checks if the PHP extension can be built successfully?

In this PR I first add that test (which will fail), then I'll add the required changes to make it pass

Fix #9724

@mlocati

mlocati commented Apr 3, 2022 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

The test introduced in feef319 fails as expected

@mlocati

mlocati commented Apr 3, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

And f0936d2 fixes the issue

@fowles

fowles commented Apr 4, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

After merging this we will need to cherry pick it back to the 3.20 line

@mkruskal-google
mkruskal-google requested a review from haberman April 4, 2022 16:15
@mkruskal-google
mkruskal-google merged commit 7f9901c into protocolbuffers:main Apr 5, 2022
@mlocati
mlocati deleted the build-packaged-php-extension branch April 5, 2022 19:12
@mlocati

mlocati commented Apr 5, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Any ETA for a new release including this fix?

mkruskal-google added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 5, 2022
Fix building packaged PHP extension

(cherry picked from commit 7f9901c)
@mkruskal-google

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

I've cherrypicked this into 3.20.1-rc1, which will likely be released this week due to issues with 3.20.0

mkruskal-google added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 7, 2022
* Fix NPE during encoding and add regression test for issue 9507.

(cherry picked from commit 58e320a)

* Implement `respond_to?` in RubyMessage (#9677)

All synthetic methods implemented by `method_missing` are now supported by `respond_to?`.

Fixes issue #9202.

* Fix null pointer exceptions exposed by new regression tests.
* Fix clear_ on oneofs so that it is safe to call repeatedly and so that respond_to? does not depend on whether the oneof is currently cleared.
* Code cleanup: reenable more tests on JRuby.
* Align JRuby behavior with CRuby by throwing a RuntimeError when attempting to assign to a oneof.

(cherry picked from commit 8e7f936)

* Update protobuf version

* Merge pull request #9727 from mlocati/build-packaged-php-extension

Fix building packaged PHP extension

(cherry picked from commit 7f9901c)

* Update protobuf version

* Update changelogs for 3.20.1-rc1

Co-authored-by: Jason Lunn <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Jorg Brown <[email protected]>
@b2875260-alt

Copy link
Copy Markdown

ขอบคุณครับทีมงานทีชวยเหลึอ

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Unable to install protobuf 3.20.0 for PHP with pecl: third_party/utf8_range/naive.loT: No such file or directory

4 participants