This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: HP/UX 10.20 vanilla <-> gcc-2.95.2
- To: martin at mira dot isdn dot cs dot tu-berlin dot de
- Subject: Re: HP/UX 10.20 vanilla <-> gcc-2.95.2
- From: N8TM at aol dot com
- Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 15:53:11 EDT
- CC: philipp at buehler dot de, gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org, hpux at connect dot org dot uk
In a message dated 10/30/99 12:47:07 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
martin@mira.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de writes:
> Pardon my ignorance. Why, exactly, is it necessary that configure
> finds a working lex, when you want to build gcc 2.95.2?
>
> lex/flex is not required for building gcc. In fact, I just removed
> flex and lex from my system, and gcc still compiles.
In fact, that's one of the alternatives I proposed; remove libl so that
binutils build doesn't take wrong branches based on the belief that lex is
available. Yes, it will build OK if libl is removed, but not if it is
configured for lex to be present when it is not.
Tim