[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: RFC: build: be robust to missing flex
From: |
Stefano Lattarini |
Subject: |
Re: RFC: build: be robust to missing flex |
Date: |
Tue, 27 Mar 2012 15:59:24 +0200 |
On 03/27/2012 03:43 PM, Akim Demaille wrote:
>
> Well, I would live happily with grep -E 'f?lex 2\.5\.35' actually,
> I don't care much about older flexes. Newer ones can be treated
> when needed, and that's not in a foreseeable future.
>
> WDYT?
>
What about going for a proper feature check in true autotools style?
I.e., try $LEX on an input that is known to work with modern flexes
and to trip non-flex lexers.
Regards,
Stefano
- RFC: build: be robust to missing flex, Akim Demaille, 2012/03/27
- Re: RFC: build: be robust to missing flex, Stefano Lattarini, 2012/03/27
- Re: RFC: build: be robust to missing flex, Akim Demaille, 2012/03/27
- Re: RFC: build: be robust to missing flex, Akim Demaille, 2012/03/27
- Re: RFC: build: be robust to missing flex, Stefano Lattarini, 2012/03/27
- Re: RFC: build: be robust to missing flex, Akim Demaille, 2012/03/27
- Re: RFC: build: be robust to missing flex, Stefano Lattarini, 2012/03/27