Bug 1744504

1/ if you need php-imap you have an issue ;)

(this rely on a dead library)

BTW, building additional extensions for EL-8 is planed, but will take some time.

PHP is no more included in BaseOS, but in AppStream

So all extensions have to be build as a new module  (php:7.2 for 8.0 and php:7.2 / php:7.3 for 8.1)

> if you need php-imap you have an issue ;)
> (this rely on a dead library)

But the library is from uw-imap which seems still maintained? ;)

Is it true that for now only "imap", "interbase" and "tidy" are suitable for epel8's php-extras? Maybe some more?

(In reply to Remi Collet from comment #1)
> 1/ if you need php-imap you have an issue ;)
> 
> (this rely on a dead library)

Thank you. That's good to know. After a quick check, I see that we don't need php-imap for cacti.
Fixed: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/cacti/c/718bc6f14b4a1b04871c7c78bc1eeb60efaae71f?branch=master

> But the library is from uw-imap which seems still maintained? ;)

Available upstream but dead upstream

> Is it true that for now only "imap", "interbase" and "tidy" are suitable for epel8's php-extras? Maybe some more?

At least "sodium"

Well, then a list (provided by f28/f29, but not by el8) looks like:

interbase  (el7 OK)
imap       (el7 OK)
pdo-dblib  (named php-mssql under el7)
sodium     (new)
pspell     (seems not activated in el7)
tidy       (el7 OK)

Whether pspell is needed?

In general: Maybe delay this stuff until all the needed libraries appear in epel8? And things become more stable there?

(In reply to Dmitry Butskoy from comment #5)
> Well, then a list (provided by f28/f29, but not by el8) looks like:


May help: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/php/blob/master/f/php.spec#_51


IMHO pspell have no value if the dictionaries (aspell-*) are not there (the reason why not build in RHEL)

> In general: Maybe delay this stuff until all the needed libraries appear in epel8? And things become more stable there?

At least delay until we know how to build additionnal package for a module.

A new module ?   (php-extras:7.2 with dependency on php:7.2)
Same module ?  (php:7.2)

> May help: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/php/blob/master/f/php.spec#_51

Exactly.

Closed/deferred for now.

If anybody sees that it is ready to going further, then reopen.

What was this waiting on?  php-sodium is becoming a fairly important part of PHP.  Not having it is definitely making things fairly painful.. for example this apparently breaks modern versions of Magneto.

I found some other bugs that talk about how RH doesn't want to add this to upstream because sodium isn't part of core, but EPEL has had libsodium available for quite some time.

Remi,

Could you please look on this?

Again, see https://pagure.io/epel/issue/75
with workaround in last comment.

RHEL (or CentOS) 8 is a modular distro.

EPEL not being modular make it a dead thing.

We're just rebuilding the upstream php spec with the following changes:

sed -i 's/with_sodium\s*0/with_sodium 1/g' /root/rpmbuild/SPECS/php.spec
sed -i 's/Requires: php-common.*//g' /root/rpmbuild/SPECS/php.spec

And then taking the resulting `php-sodium-7.2.24-1.el8.x86_64` RPM and adding that to our internal repo.  This ends up working just fine for us, but I can see how it's not really a general solution.

@brak, why building, when package build from EPEL-8 ready spec file are available ?
Ex: https://rpms.remirepo.net/temp/epel-8-php-7.2/php-sodium-7.2.24-1.epel8.7.2.x86_64.rpm

This will allow to test them as this is exactly what will appear in EPEL when infra issue will be fixed...

I'm kinda scared of installing something from a "/temp/" directory onto our production servers.