DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date
	:message-id:subject:to:content-type; q=dns; s=default; b=CBun0oW
	Llcis6HbNfZfWV1AFL1Is3Ha1trxuf7f6FnQckRAi7IWJWMRxrRV1EZRnThj7Mt2
	QYlFnaTFyFkmScQSkzU8pMq9tHV7UNbTcKMCtWeIV4G/9kCpWRj3K4n/gRmU5mf5
	/+CNMukEoepLV7F8nhs72Mmbd55Tq48I7lk0=
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5a49530b.1d0b9d0a.17c20.f7f6@mx.google.com>
References: <5a49530b.1d0b9d0a.17c20.f7f6@mx.google.com>
From: Stephen John Smoogen <smooge@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2017 17:47:11 -0500
Message-ID: <CANnLRdj19K15+do5bqyY1-MCB7O3qS+By58gaAUTgtvE=C2JRA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: flex package POSIX violation
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

On 31 December 2017 at 16:13, Steven Penny <svnpenn@gmail.com> wrote:
> The POSIX standard, at least since 1997 [1], requires the presence of a
> "lex"
> utility.
>
> Most systems (including Cygwin) provide a Lex implementation via the "flex"
> package. However with other OS, a "lex -> flex" symlink is provided, whereas
> the
> Cygwin package does not.
>
> Please resolve this, thanks.
>

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?


-- 
Stephen J Smoogen.

--
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