"Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> Not that hard to believe. 2.5.4 is what the major distributions are 
> shipping.
> Even FC4 comes with 2.5.4a. The only reason I can see for this is that Flex
> is now considered a NON-GNU project.

No, the major reason for it is that flex 2.5.31 is seriously broken and
non-compatible with its prior releases.  I wasn't aware that they'd gone
so far as to remove a documented macro (one that was documented in 2.5.4
as the *preferred* way to do things, mind you) but we already knew of
several other issues with it.  See the archives.

I'll try to snarf a copy and see if there's a way to do it that's
compatible with both releases, but it's the flex authors' own fault
that 2.5.31 has had such poor uptake.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

• Re: What bison versions are installed on buildfarm machines? at 2006-01-02 19:00:21 from Joshua D. Drake

Responses

• Re: What bison versions are installed on buildfarm machines? at 2006-01-02 19:21:55 from Stefan Kaltenbrunner

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Bruce Momjian	Date: 2006-01-02 19:13:47
	Subject: Re: Stats collector performance improvement
Previous:	From: Tom Lane	Date: 2006-01-02 19:06:38
	Subject: Re: Why don't we allow DNS names in pg_hba.conf?