Hi Bernd, On Thu, 2014-11-20 14:34:00 +0100, Bernd Edlinger <bernd.edlin...@hotmail.de> wrote: > > This patch updates the files taken from Automake. Committed. > > the updated version of "missing" will confuse the gmp-4.3.2 configure > script if it is installed in-tree with "contrib/download_prerequisites" > and flex is not installed: > > ... > checking readline detected... no > checking for bison... (cached) /home/ed/gnu/gcc-5-20141116/missing bison -y > checking for flex... (cached) /home/ed/gnu/gcc-5-20141116/missing flex > checking lex output file root... configure: error: cannot find output from > /home/ed/gnu/gcc-5-20141116/missing flex; giving up > make[3]: *** [config.status] Error 1 > make[3]: Leaving directory `/home/ed/gnu/gcc-build-arm-linux-gnueabihf/gmp' > make[2]: *** [all-stage1-gmp] Error 2 > make[2]: Leaving directory `/home/ed/gnu/gcc-build-arm-linux-gnueabihf' > make[1]: *** [stage1-bubble] Error 2 > make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/ed/gnu/gcc-build-arm-linux-gnueabihf' > make: *** [all] Error 2 > > previous version of missing flex produced a dummy lex.yy.c, > as does the version in the gmp package, but unfortunately it is > overwritten by the "missing" script in the gcc tree.
"Overridden" actually by setting/exporting $FLEX and $LEX to GCC's own file and calling GMP's `configure' that way. > That's probably just not a supported configuration anymore, > but all previous GCC releases worked without a installed flex tool. I don't think something change wrt. the GMP version, see https://gcc.gnu.org/install/prerequisites.html. (And it's the same problem with current gmp-6.0.0a, so even updating GMP wouldn't help.) > mAYBE the problem goes away if a newer version of gmp is used, > or if the "missing flex" is not passed down to the gmp configure script, > somehow. Actually, it is not really needed by gmp at all. It seems the only flex'able source file (in both GMP-4.3.2 and current 6.0.0a) is a demo file. > I tried to add this hunk from the old version and it made, the gmp configure > script worked again: > > --- missing.orig 2014-11-16 14:07:13.000000000 +0000 > +++ missing 2014-11-19 15:01:57.168967538 +0000 > @@ -172,6 +172,21 @@ > echo "You should only need it if you modified a '.l' file." > echo "You may want to install the Fast Lexical Analyzer package:" > echo "<$flex_URL>" > + rm -f lex.yy.c > + if test $# -ne 1; then > + eval LASTARG="\${$#}" > + case $LASTARG in > + *.l) > + SRCFILE=`echo "$LASTARG" | sed 's/l$/c/'` > + if test -f "$SRCFILE"; then > + cp "$SRCFILE" lex.yy.c > + fi > + ;; > + esac > + fi > + if test ! -f lex.yy.c; then > + echo 'main() { return 0; }'>lex.yy.c > + fi > ;; > help2man*) > echo "You should only need it if you modified a dependency" \ > > > What do you think? That patch defeats my attempt to re-sync with upstream files. :) The Automake guys decided that faking a tool by simulating a successful run isn't that much of a good idea, and thinking about it, this looks like a good decision. I actually kind of think that this is simply a small bug in GMP. It shouldn't require a working flex just for potentially building some demo file. After all, the release tarballs could just contain the .c file. No need for the lex file at all! However, I *think* the real problem is the way flags are passed. Top-level `configure' doesn't find `flex' (okay) and sets FLEX="...../missing flex". This $FLEX gets passed by Makefile down to GMP's `configure', which by now should, IMO, point to a /working/ flex. That way, GMP's `configure' of course will choke finding the generated output file. So what shall we do now? I'd be quite okay with reverting my `missing' update for now, until this is actually fixed. However, It would be nice if we'd discuss that, along with the GMP guys. Another fix (or is it a workaround?) would be to not hand down $FLEX and $LEX: diff --git a/Makefile.def b/Makefile.def index 40bbca9..7b988fe 100644 --- a/Makefile.def +++ b/Makefile.def @@ -229,13 +229,11 @@ flags_to_pass = { flag= CC_FOR_BUILD ; }; flags_to_pass = { flag= CFLAGS_FOR_BUILD ; }; flags_to_pass = { flag= CXX_FOR_BUILD ; }; flags_to_pass = { flag= EXPECT ; }; -flags_to_pass = { flag= FLEX ; }; flags_to_pass = { flag= INSTALL ; }; flags_to_pass = { flag= INSTALL_DATA ; }; flags_to_pass = { flag= INSTALL_PROGRAM ; }; flags_to_pass = { flag= INSTALL_SCRIPT ; }; flags_to_pass = { flag= LDFLAGS_FOR_BUILD ; }; -flags_to_pass = { flag= LEX ; }; flags_to_pass = { flag= M4 ; }; flags_to_pass = { flag= MAKE ; }; flags_to_pass = { flag= RUNTEST ; }; (...and regenerate Makefile{,.in}.) However, we need to discuss that. I'll head over to the GMP bugs mailing list and discuss your build error over there. MfG, JBG -- Jan-Benedict Glaw jbg...@lug-owl.de +49-172-7608481 Signature of: Friends are relatives you make for yourself. the second :
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
