HP/UX 10.20 vanilla <-> gcc-2.95.2

[Martin v. Loewis]

> 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.

I thought we were talking about building GCC; how is building binutils
relevant, here? I still don't see why any trickery with lex (be it
installing flex, or removing libl) is necessary to build gcc.

Martin