[ofa-general] Re: OpenSM build now requires lex (flex) and yacc (bison)?

[Ira Weiny]

On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 13:31:38 -0400
Doug Ledford <dledford at redhat.com> wrote:

> On Fri, 2009-03-20 at 10:23 -0700, Ira Weiny wrote:
> > On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 15:43:07 +0200
> > Sasha Khapyorsky <sashak at voltaire.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi Ira,
> > > 
> > > On 13:39 Thu 12 Mar     , Ira Weiny wrote:
> > > > diff --git a/opensm/opensm.spec.in b/opensm/opensm.spec.in
> > > > index 7b82faf..3f02235 100644
> > > > --- a/opensm/opensm.spec.in
> > > > +++ b/opensm/opensm.spec.in
> > > > @@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ Group: System Environment/Daemons
> > > >  URL: http://  openfabrics.org/
> > > >  Source: http://  www.  openfabrics.org/downloads/management/@TARBALL@
> > > >  BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
> > > > -BuildRequires: libibumad-devel, libtool
> > > > +BuildRequires: bison, flex, libibumad-devel, libtool
> > > 
> > > Indeed lex and  yacc are needed for OpenSM build now. However different
> > > tools can be used (lex, flex, yacc, bison, byacc, etc.). Also some
> > > distributions are using other than bison and flex tools. Will this patch
> > > limit tool set (and break build on distros which doesn't have bison and
> > > flex)? If yes, could this be done using generic requirements?
> > 
> > I wondered the same thing and was hoping Doug would chime in on how he did it.
> > As far as I know there is no way to generically check.
> > 
> > On the other hand I have polled around here and no one knows of a rpm distro
> > which does not provide bison or flex.  Perhaps some of the other distros will
> > chime in if this will break them.
> 
> It shouldn't, those are the standards (I think they are even required by
> the LSB but I could be wrong).  I just added the appropriate
> BuildRequires: entries and went on.
> 

So, just to be clear, applying this patch to the master would make your life
easier as well?

Ira