[REF][PHP8.2] Add patches to pear upstream packages to fix issues with PHP8.2

[seamuslee001]

Overview

This applies some patches / fixes based on upstream PRs to pear/db and pear/core-minimal packages to fix issues in PHP8.2

Before

Pear db and pear core minimal code not compatible for PHP8.2

After

Code seems to work fine for PHP8.2

ping @eileenmcnaughton @demeritcowboy @totten

[civibot]

(Standard links)

• If this is your first pull-request for CiviCRM, please browse CONTRIBUTING.md for information about the development and testing processes.
• If you are reviewing this pull-request, you may wish to consult the test sites and the Review Standards (long template, short template).

[demeritcowboy]

It looks like there are some fails on the upstream patch?

[seamuslee001]

@demeritcowboy I think the Upstream test fails are unrelated

[demeritcowboy]

Ok I see they've had those errors for a while.
On the db_dataobject one, is the idea it's better to patch DB than DataObject because DataObject is abandoned? Because it looks like that num_rows is never read anywhere.

Otherwise this looks good. And there shouldn't be the same issue as zetamail when they're merged upstream since the version here is fixed at a specific version. Although given this is for php 8.2 would it be easier to just wait until they are merged upstream and then update the pear::db version?

[seamuslee001]

@demeritcowboy well I chose to patch DB because that was the class that the dynamic property was being created on when you look at L 4778 http://svn.php.net/viewvc/pear/packages/DB_DataObject/trunk/DB/DataObject.php?view=markup&pathrev=339312

it does this

4776	        // this is a huge bug in DB!
4777	        if (isset($_DB_DATAOBJECT['CONNECTIONS'][$this->_database_dsn_md5])) {
4778	            $_DB_DATAOBJECT['CONNECTIONS'][$this->_database_dsn_md5]->num_rows = array();
4779	        }

Which I think means that we have to patch DB not the dataobject but I suppose we could rip those parts of the DB_DATAObject our of our version instead.

[seamuslee001]

@demeritcowboy @totten as per discussion here https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/3958#note_84022 I have pulled the DataObject compatibility patch from this PR and created civicrm/civicrm-packages#354

[demeritcowboy]

I clicked around a bit. I figure something would fail pretty quickly if it was a problem.