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
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
