[drupal-devel] [task] GD2-specific functions should be moved to image.gd2.inc

stefan nagtegaal drupal-devel at drupal.org
Tue Mar 29 08:52:57 UTC 2005

Issue status update for http://drupal.org/node/19611

 Project:      Drupal
 Version:      cvs
 Component:    base system
 Category:     tasks
 Priority:     normal
 Assigned to:  Junyor
 Reported by:  Junyor
 Updated by:   stefan nagtegaal
 Status:       patch

I tend to agree here..
We should separate api and code as much as possible, the same as text
and markup.
Imo this is a +1 from me, though I did not (yet) test this patch nor
took a look at the coding styles...

stefan nagtegaal

Previous comments:

March 28, 2005 - 22:46 : Junyor

Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/system-image.patch (6.8 KB)

The new image handling tools in core have a lot of GD2-specific logic,
making image.inc overly cluttered and complicated.  If gd2 were just
treated like another toolkit (though the only one included by default),
then the image.inc code would be much cleaner and more easily
This patch removes all the GD2 stuff from image.inc and puts it into
image.gd2.inc.  The _settings hook is now doing what it sounds like it
should, return settings for the toolkit.  I've added a _check hook
which will tell if the PHP functions needed are available.  If _check
fails, then the toolkit will not be listed on admin > settings and an
error will be logged in watchdog.
I've also update image.gd1.inc, image.imlib.inc, and image.imagick.inc
with the same logic.


March 28, 2005 - 23:08 : Junyor

Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/image.gd2.inc (3.07 KB)


March 28, 2005 - 23:09 : Junyor

Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/image.gd1_0.inc (1.8 KB)


March 28, 2005 - 23:09 : Junyor

Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/image.imagick.inc (2.19 KB)


March 28, 2005 - 23:10 : Junyor

Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/image.imlib.inc (2.07 KB)


March 29, 2005 - 00:44 : gordon

I am not too sure if the gd tool kit should be split into 2 tool kits.
Now I am only speaking from a debian pov, but the php4-gd package is
linked against gd2. Also from a Drupal POV, the difference between gd1
and gd2 are so minor that having them as they have always been, as
effectively 1 tool kit has alway made sence from a maintenance POV.
Also the standard php extension is just called gd.
-1 on dividing gd1 and gd2 into separate tool kits.


March 29, 2005 - 00:51 : Junyor

@Gordon: They already are separate toolkits.  There's *no* GD 1
processing in core at all.  This patch separates all the GD 2 specific
functions from the general toolkit handling functions.  The GD 1
toolkit attached here was provided by Stefan.


March 29, 2005 - 01:22 : gordon

You have missed what I am saying. In php there is no gd1 or gd2, where
is just gd. which libary you use all depends on which one you link the
gd extension against.
So in the case of core, I think it was a bad move to remove all the gd1
code as it means that we require the gd module to linked against gd2 and
will not work if it is not linked against gd1.


March 29, 2005 - 02:57 : walkah

Junyor : the gd support that is "bundled" with image.inc is meant only
as a minimal "typical case" support for gd2 - so that image.inc will
work out of the box in most installations (keep in mind that gd2 has
been bundled with php 4.3 and that drupal 4.6 will require 4.3.3+). 
extra / additional toolkits are on an as-needed basis, and have already
begun development - including a "gd2 advanced" that will make additional
options available.
the current behaviour, however, is very much by design (in fact, it was
originally separated in my sandbox).


March 29, 2005 - 09:36 : Junyor

@Gordon: image.inc specifically checks to make sure GD 2 is installed. 
It does not work with GD 1 as is.  That's why Stefan had to make a
separate GD 1 toolkit.
@Walkah: GD 2 can still work out of the box with my design.  We'd
include image.inc and image.gd2.inc in the Drupal bundle, with the
other toolkits available elsewhere.  This change makes image.inc more
future-proof, cleaner, and smaller.  I don't see why that's a bad
thing.  In other words, this may be by design, but I think it's a bad


March 29, 2005 - 09:42 : chx

junyor, yesterday night Steven has fixed a very irritating bug in image
module (variable_get...'gd2') so your system-image.patch won't apply.
Please reroll.

More information about the drupal-devel mailing list