php-cli and php-cgi

[Uroš Gruber]

Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 13, 2006 at 11:33:23AM +0100, Uro? Gruber wrote:
>   
>> I'm not being rude. I just pointed that I'm using cgi and cli (not mod 
>> as he refer). I've read UPDATING
>> and if you're talking about 2004 when port is split to php-extension 
>> etc. I think this is not the case.
>>     
>
> Uros,
>
> How does your solution (re: naming the PHP interpreter php-cli and
> php-cgi, respectively) handle scripts and utilities which rely on
> the existance of /usr/local/bin/php (or simply "php" in your path)?
>
>   
I use a lot of those scripts and for now all rely on php (cli) so I have 
symlink to php-cli. Because
php-cgi is used only from apache or other web server. Also I have 
php5-cgi and php4-cgi so
I can use either php4 or php5.
> The answer will probably be "a symlink".  Okay, which PHP binary do
> you choose to symlink to?  php-cgi or php-cli?
>
> I cannot tell you how many times I have seen on mailing lists for
> PHP-related software, especially suphp, individuals asking why the
> software didn't work -- only to find out they had installed the CLI
> version of PHP, not the CGI version.
>   
I know that making this changes would break some other ports. But I 
think because of fast-cgi i found
that many admins are using cgi version of php instead. So It needs to be 
solved some how. Maybe with
some WITH_ switch to not break other ports but still possible to install 
both cli and cgi from ports.
> I do acknowledge that you can have both on a single system; there is
> no denying that.  But /usr/local/bin/php has to be one or the other.
> Presently, PHP doesn't offer a way for software or scripts (i.e.
> GNU configure scripts) to determine which type is installed, as far
> as I know...
>
> This is probably one of many reasons why the CLI and CGI ports are
> split
regards

Uros