Gossamer Forum
Home : Products : Gossamer Links : Pre Sales :

Re: In-Link 2.0 vs. Links SQL

 
Re: In-Link 2.0 vs. Links SQL In reply to
Just some things :)

In Reply To:
There are things you cannot do with PHP that you can do with perl, cron jobs are one.
PHP can installed as a CGI, so you have the shebang up the top

#!/usr/bin/php

and then run that script on cron. So PHP can have cron jobs.

And the reason that search engines don't index the PHP pages is when they have the little pain in the neck "?" symbol in the URL. Using a neat little trick, writing the URL as...

http://www.domain.com/page.php/variable1/value1/variable2/value2/

And then access all that using the path_info global thingo - and splitting it up, you can pass values in URL's and have search engines use it. So a links page might look like...

http://www.site.com/page.php/action/add/template/snap/

In regards to question though, I think Links SQL is the best option to use. The actual features isn't really an issue, as it is easy to add stuff to existing scripts (Hacking them in, making a plug in might be a bit more work...), but the overall code/logic/backend of this script is so good - you will want to use it. This is coming from a PHP user - so don't think I'm a religious perl person that is trying to influence ya :)

Michael Bray
Subject Author Views Date
Thread; locked thread In-Link 2.0 vs. Links SQL JosephLevy 22098 Jul 18, 2001, 4:54 PM
Thread Re: In-Link 2.0 vs. Links SQL
Stealth 21807 Jul 18, 2001, 5:24 PM
Thread Re: In-Link 2.0 vs. Links SQL
pugdog 21827 Jul 18, 2001, 5:58 PM
Thread Re: In-Link 2.0 vs. Links SQL
JosephLevy 21835 Jul 18, 2001, 9:57 PM
Thread Re: In-Link 2.0 vs. Links SQL
pugdog 21805 Jul 18, 2001, 11:58 PM
Thread Re: In-Link 2.0 vs. Links SQL
BeaverheadRiver 21488 Aug 12, 2001, 8:41 AM
Post Re: In-Link 2.0 vs. Links SQL
QooQ 4843 Aug 17, 2001, 6:08 PM
Post Re: In-Link 2.0 vs. Links SQL
Paul 21733 Jul 19, 2001, 5:17 AM
Thread Re: In-Link 2.0 vs. Links SQL
Alex 21778 Jul 19, 2001, 11:26 AM
Thread Re: In-Link 2.0 vs. Links SQL
Ian_Conza 21636 Aug 10, 2001, 12:51 AM
Thread Re: In-Link 2.0 vs. Links SQL
Paul 21650 Aug 10, 2001, 3:59 AM
Post Re: In-Link 2.0 vs. Links SQL
Ian_Conza 21554 Aug 10, 2001, 3:28 PM
Thread Re: In-Link 2.0 vs. Links SQL
doublemint 21647 Aug 10, 2001, 4:08 PM
Thread Re: In-Link 2.0 vs. Links SQL
Paul 21602 Aug 10, 2001, 4:10 PM
Post Re: In-Link 2.0 vs. Links SQL
doublemint 21609 Aug 10, 2001, 4:18 PM
Thread In-Link 2.0 vs. Links SQL
Ian_Conza 21514 Aug 12, 2001, 1:34 AM
Thread Re: In-Link 2.0 vs. Links SQL
Paul 21560 Aug 12, 2001, 3:54 AM
Thread Re: In-Link 2.0 vs. Links SQL
Michael_Bray 21504 Aug 12, 2001, 4:33 AM
Thread Re: In-Link 2.0 vs. Links SQL
Paul 21530 Aug 12, 2001, 4:40 AM
Thread Re: In-Link 2.0 vs. Links SQL
Michael_Bray 21480 Aug 12, 2001, 5:56 AM
Post Re: In-Link 2.0 vs. Links SQL
Paul 21478 Aug 12, 2001, 7:00 AM
Thread Re: In-Link 2.0 vs. Links SQL
Michael_Bray 21606 Aug 10, 2001, 8:02 AM
Thread Re: In-Link 2.0 vs. Links SQL
pugdog 21534 Aug 10, 2001, 11:18 AM
Thread Re: In-Link 2.0 vs. Links SQL
Michael_Bray 21537 Aug 10, 2001, 10:16 PM
Thread Re: In-Link 2.0 vs. Links SQL
Alex 21570 Aug 11, 2001, 10:31 AM
Post Re: In-Link 2.0 vs. Links SQL
Michael_Bray 21499 Aug 11, 2001, 10:39 PM
Thread Re: In-Link 2.0 vs. Links SQL
account deleted 4772 Sep 6, 2001, 2:03 PM
Thread Re: In-Link 2.0 vs. Links SQL
Michael_Bray 4731 Sep 6, 2001, 9:59 PM
Thread Re: In-Link 2.0 vs. Links SQL
QooQ 4784 Sep 7, 2001, 3:39 PM
Thread Re: In-Link 2.0 vs. Links SQL
Paul 4724 Sep 7, 2001, 5:58 PM
Thread Re: In-Link 2.0 vs. Links SQL
Paul 4696 Sep 7, 2001, 6:00 PM
Thread Re: In-Link 2.0 vs. Links SQL
QooQ 4682 Sep 7, 2001, 7:20 PM
Post Re: In-Link 2.0 vs. Links SQL
Stealth 4694 Sep 7, 2001, 7:41 PM