Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: What bison versions are installed on buildfarm machines?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: What bison versions are installed on buildfarm machines?
Date: 2006-01-02 19:12:03
Message-ID: 8069.1136229123@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
"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

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

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

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group