Magnus Hagander napsal(a):
On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 11:36, Dave Page <dp...@pgadmin.org> wrote:
On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 5:42 AM, Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net> wrote:
Yes. I spent a few cents and a few hours wrestling with it. AFAICT your are
hosed on 64bit Windows. I can't get flex built and Cygwin is behaving very
oddly. There are indications that the problem could be fairly deep - see
<http://www.mail-archive.com/cyg...@cygwin.com/msg102463.html>
What Linda describes there is all normal behaviour for a 32 bit app on
64 bit Windows. Windows is providing a virtual 32 bit environment,
where for the most part the 32 bit app doesn't realise it's running on
64 bit. Unfortunately there are always things that look a bit odd due
to this, but normally I've found that the 32bit code runs fine, it
just looks odd from Explorer or 64 bit apps because of the
folder/registry redirection that happens behind the scenes.
Yeah, none of that should have an effect on a tool like "flex", though...
I think the actual problem is the implementation of fork emulation which
changed in 1.7.
I can try again with Cygwin 1.7. and see if that improves matters, but I bet
it doesn't.
Cygwin 1.7.0-52 (iirc) with flex works for me on x64 Vista.
What about msys? Or is that not capable of building the newer versions of flex?
IIRC we looked at that before, and that one is also limited to the
version before they started doing fork() (that was the problem with
the newer ones and gnuwin32, iirc)
No they have newest flex, but the whole thing is even more broken on
64bit then (old) cygwin version - it just exits without doing anything
and does not even report any errors.
--
Regards
Petr Jelinek (PJMODOS)
