FYI, my "make build" went through without an error, I guess the patch can
be committed and the PR below closed. 

Note that this won't help for the package on 1.4.x, though!


 - Hubert

On Wed, 15 Mar 2000, Nick Hudson wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I filed PR8258 about this several months ago. It looks as though lukem broke
> C++ support when delinting the C output.
> 
> Nick
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Simon Burge" <simonb@NetBSD.ORG>
> To: "Berndt Josef Wulf" <wulf@ping.net.au>
> Cc: <tech-pkg@NetBSD.ORG>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2000 5:02 AM
> Subject: Re: kdevelop-current
> 
> 
> > Berndt Josef Wulf wrote:
> >
> > > Simon Burge wrote
> > > > >
> > > > > That would be nice... who is the right person to talk about this
> > > > > problem. I've avoided to raise a PR on this as I am not familiar
> with
> > > > > the circumstances why we are still using flex-2.5.4 and not
> > > > > flex-2.5.4a, there surely must be a reason for it.
> > > >
> > > > The _only_ difference between 2.5.4 and 2.5.4a is the addition of the
> > > > words "with or without modification" added to some copyright notices.
> > > > However, the NetBSD version has been modified, and it would appear
> that
> > > > somehow we have broken it in the process.  I've just done a quick diff
> > > > between 2.5.4a and what's in our tree and can't see anything obviously
> > > > wrong.  What exactly is the problem that you're seeing that doesn't
> > > > occur with a stock flex 2.5.4a?
> > >
> > > The main difference between the resulting file generated by NetBSD's
> > > flex and the pkgsrc flex utility are the missing declarations around
> > > line 207 as shown below:
> >
> > Ok, it seems that the declaration of those routines moved to part of
> > flex.skl where flex ignores them if used in "C++" mode.  Can you try
> > the following patch to see if it fixes the problem?
> >
> > Also, are you (or anyone else listening) in a position to do a "make
> > build" to see if this breaks anything during a complete NetBSD build?
> >
> > Simon.
> > --
> > Index: flex.skl
> > ===================================================================
> > RCS file: /cvsroot/basesrc/usr.bin/lex/flex.skl,v
> > retrieving revision 1.12
> > diff -p -u -r1.12 flex.skl
> > --- flex.skl 1999/01/18 22:18:17 1.12
> > +++ flex.skl 2000/03/15 04:57:07
> > @@ -254,6 +254,12 @@ YY_BUFFER_STATE yy_scan_string YY_PROTO(
> >  YY_BUFFER_STATE yy_scan_bytes YY_PROTO(( yyconst char *bytes, yy_size_t
> len ));
> >  %*
> >
> > +static void *yy_flex_alloc YY_PROTO(( yy_size_t ));
> > +#ifndef YY_USES_REJECT
> > +static void *yy_flex_realloc YY_PROTO(( void *, yy_size_t ));
> > +#endif
> > +static void yy_flex_free YY_PROTO(( void * ));
> > +
> >  #define yy_new_buffer yy_create_buffer
> >
> >  #define yy_set_interactive(is_interactive) \
> > @@ -275,11 +281,6 @@ YY_BUFFER_STATE yy_scan_bytes YY_PROTO((
> >  %% yytext/yyin/yyout/yy_state_type/yylineno etc. def's & init go here
> >
> >  %- Standard (non-C++) definition
> > -static void *yy_flex_alloc YY_PROTO(( yy_size_t ));
> > -#ifndef YY_USES_REJECT
> > -static void *yy_flex_realloc YY_PROTO(( void *, yy_size_t ));
> > -#endif
> > -static void yy_flex_free YY_PROTO(( void * ));
> >  static yy_state_type yy_get_previous_state YY_PROTO(( void ));
> >  static yy_state_type yy_try_NUL_trans YY_PROTO(( yy_state_type
> current_state ));
> >  static int yy_get_next_buffer YY_PROTO(( void ));
> 

-- 
Microsoft: "Where do you want to go today?"
Linux:     "Where do you want to be tomorrow?"
BSD:       "Are you guys coming, or what?"