flex-2.5.31

David Jensen djensen at inebraska.com
Sun Jun 12 11:54:13 PDT 2005


Matthew Burgess wrote:

> David Jensen wrote:
>
>> 1.  The order of the files in flex-2.5.31-debian_fixes-2.patch may 
>> sometimes trigger regenerating scan.c, which causes the build to fail 
>> if flex is not already installed.
>> -- Solution:  Move the scan.c section of the patch to after the 
>> scan.l section. Build and install per the current instructions.
>
>
> OK, see 
> http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~matthew/flex-2.5.31-debian_fixes-3.patch 
> for the updated patch.  I realise Alexander posted another solution, 
> but I'm worried folks get so accustomed to *not* having to use the 
> '-Z' switch, they'll miss it out on this one, then get bitten by what 
> is a pretty obscure error.
>
Great, I'll look at it.

>> 2.  Now there is a flex installed but it does not incorporate the 
>> patched scan.l and flex.skl.
>> -- Solution: touch scan.l flex.skl; ./configure --prefix=/usr; make; 
>> make install.  the ./configure, again, is required to pick up the 
>> newly installed flex, else scan.c is destroyed and it bombs.
>
>
> OK, you've lost me here.  If I understand correctly, we've just 
> changed the patch from updating scan.l *after* scan.c to have it 
> update scan.l *before* scan.c so that scan.c doesn't get rebuilt, thus 
> requiring a host-installed flex to be present.  Now you're saying that 
> we need scan.c to be rebuilt anyway, so that it includes the patched 
> contents of  scan.l?  Is there some way we can change the patch so 
> that it changes scan.c only, but includes all the changes from scan.l too?


Yes, but it is huge, see the size of the 
flex-2.5.31-debian_fixes-4.patch, it is all in there. 924K.
It seems easier, perhaps 'more pure' to regenerate locally.

--
David Jensen





More information about the lfs-dev mailing list