Re: Compilation errors

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Compilation errors
Date: 2007-02-28 22:02:17
Message-ID: 45E5FBE9.1010700@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>
>> Gregory Stark wrote:
>>
>>> flex 2.5.33
>>>
>
>
>> Aha! Known to be broken, iirc. Use flex 2.5.4a
>>
>
> No, the known breakages with flex were years ago; 2.5.33 has only been
> out a year. I think 2.5.31 might have been the one we saw big problems
> with (there's a note warning against using it on the flex sourceforge
> page).
>
> I think most of us do still use 2.5.4a, but it'd probably be a good idea
> to check out 2.5.33 and see if it can be made to not generate warnings.
> I'm certainly tired of seeing the warnings 2.5.4a creates ...
>

It gives me the same warnings that Greg reported.

I guess we could conditionally add prototypes for those functions to all
the .l files if you really want to move to 2.5.33. Kinda yucky, though.

cheers

andrew

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2007-02-28 22:13:59 Re: Compilation errors
Previous Message Jonah H. Harris 2007-02-28 21:46:26 Re: COMMIT NOWAIT Performance Option