Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
Matthew Burgess wrote:
Having said that, does anyone know for definite whether anything in
LFS requires flex anymore, now that we're using FSF binutils again?
Playing devil's advocate here, maybe we could kick this package over
the fence to BLFS and let you guys deal with the pain it causes? :)
I was pretty sure that Jim had checked this and found that indeed with
FSF Binutils nothing in LFS uses flex. But he should comment on that
himself...
I remembered everyone getting upset at me. "Flex is needed for a
functional system is what I was told."
--
JH
--
------
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
LFS User # 2577
Registered Linux User # 299986
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
