From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Goirand Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2010 17:33:37 +0000 Subject: Re: [mlmmj] Is using the include path for php-admin a good idea? Message-Id: <4CAB6171.4010603@goirand.fr> List-Id: References: <4CA87D1F.6030009@yahoo.com.au> In-Reply-To: <4CA87D1F.6030009@yahoo.com.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: mlmmj@mlmmj.org Ben Schmidt wrote: >>>> As a longtime php-coder, here's my opinion: >>>> - Putting it in the include path is a bad idea >>>> - hardcoding the path also >>>> So best of all: figure out the current filepath, put it in a variable >>>> and start from there (don't put this in a config file, it can be >>>> determined automatically), something like "dirname(__FILE__);" or to >>>> have the parent dir "basename(dirname(__FILE__));" >> >> I agree that here, there's absolutely no point in adding the include >> path. That one is to use ... include, not at all for opening files >> like the php-admin would need. It makes no sense in this context. > > Have a look at my attached proposed patch. The interface was already > updated since the bug report was filed, but looking for tunables.pl > relative to $templatedir seems senseless to me, so I've added another > variable, $confdir. I've removed hard-coded paths and used paths > relative to __FILE__ instead. Finding config.php in the first place > could still be difficult, but at least the require directive for it is > at the top of each file, so it's easy to find what to change. > > What do you think? > > Ben. That's a much much much better solution, definitively! Somebody has sent a bug report on the MLMMJ package in Debian, about this issue, I guess he was reading the list. I guess I'll have to apply this patch to the SID/Squeeze package before the release. Thomas