On Sun, 31 Dec 2017 17:47:11, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
How POSIX compliant is Cygwin supposed to be? I don't think many of the tools are 100% POSIX compliant but are good enough so does making the symlink between flex and lex make it more compliant or less so because the tool doesn't meet 100% compliance?
are these some questions to really want to have asked? POSIX standard demands a "lex" utility - so providing a "lex -> flex" symlink makes the Cygwin package more POSIX compliant - im sorry but i cant see how you couldnt understand why that would be the case. and while yes 100% compliance is certainly an asymptote, that doesnt mean we shouldnt even try - especially when it is a simple fix, as in this case. also, per my post [1] you quoted, and yaakov post [2], most major distros are doing this already. [1] http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2017-12/msg00296.html [2] http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2017-12/msg00298.html -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
