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: N8TM at aol dot com
- Subject: Re: HP/UX 10.20 vanilla <-> gcc-2.95.2
- From: "Martin v. Loewis" <martin at mira dot isdn dot cs dot tu-berlin dot de>
- Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 21:44:34 +0200
- CC: philipp at buehler dot de, gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org, hpux at connect dot org dot uk
- References: <0.de16cb7d.254c8ae1@aol.com>
> > You should not need bison for the released gcc; it is needed only when
> > you modify the GCC sources (the bison input in particular).
> At the cost of boring repeat readers, the reason for installing
> bison is in order to be able to install flex so that gcc will not
> misconfigure on account of the lex library being found, even though
> lex is not present. This could be cured by a better configure
> script which actually checks for presence of lex rather than libl,
> or by removing libl before running configure, or by installing the
> lex, which is part of the "ANSI C" extra cost development package.
> I found it more practical to install bison and flex.
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.
I believe that even the autoconf test could be removed, but that's a
different issue.
Regards,
Martin