Re: Overhauling lang/pear

[Benny Siegert <bsiegert%gmail.com@localhost>]

On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 2:07 PM Jonathan Perkin <jperkin%pkgsrc.org@localhost> wrote:
> As nobody else seemed interested in fixing this despite it being the top
> breakage for months, I looked into it, and did not like what I saw!  I
> can now understand why :)  This has to be some of the most packaging
> hostile code I've ever seen.

Thank you for your service, Jonathan!

I think Takahiro-san is the person that typically updates PHP and
PEAR, so I Cc'd him explicitly.

>    https://github.com/TritonDataCenter/pkgsrc/commit/c85b955e68c80d27764e8b15d6c942ca3b7178f2

I am confused about this bit in the patch:

+DISTNAME= pearweb_phars-1.10.24
+PKGREVISION= 3
+PKGNAME= ${PHP_PKG_PREFIX}-pear-1.10.16

Why does 1.10.24 include pear 1.10.16? Is that just an upstream oddity?

The page at https://pear.php.net/manual/en/installation.getting.php
says something like

> When using PHP, the PEAR Package Manager is already installed unless one has used the ./configure option --without-pear.

So should we have a separate pear package at all? Should we build it
from the PHP tarball?


> It would be better, long term, if these files were to go in VARBASE, but
> at least from a cursory glance there doesn't appear to be an official
> option to configure this, which is very odd.

Someone(TM) should file that as an upstream bug.

-- 
Benny