В Срд, 02.07.2003, в 00:42, Tom Lane пишет: > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Tom Lane wrote: > >> Maybe make configure act as though bison is missing? Not sure. It > >> seems like that could create unnecessary problems in other cases. > > > One trick would be to set YACC to some special value like > > "bison.too.old" and test for that when YACC is actually called from the > > Makefile. > > I kinda like Alvaro's suggestion of an --ignore-bison-version option > to configure to suppress checking the version, but otherwise error out > if we think bison is too old. > > The advantage to that is that you could manually override the automatic > check if you had reason to know it was wrong (eg, you could see it'd > misparsed the bison version string, or something). Also, it'd make > sense to include that option by default in RPM builds, where you'd know > you had up-to-date bison output files already included in the SRPM.
But it seems weird to require a switch for the normal case, i.e. a tarball build, and not require it for a cvs build. I don't see overriding as an advantage, too, because misparsing of the bison version string would just be a bug that had to be fixed, imo. You can as well modify configure in that case to make it compile, and send the patch to the bison version parser in afterwards. Maybe add a comment to the Makefile where bison is called that gives a hint to the user in case bison fails. -- Markus Bertheau. Berlin, Berlin. Germany. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly