Boost :

Date view	Thread view	Subject view	Author view

Subject: Re: [boost] Boost Modularization: did we get it right?
From: Mathias Gaunard (mathias.gaunard_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-05-15 18:51:08

Next message: Nathan Ridge: "Re: [boost] [fusion] Trouble using BOOST_FUSION_ADAPT_ADT with boost::fusion::operator<"
Previous message: Matthew Chambers: "Re: [boost] [ot] choosing a build system"
In reply to: Steven Watanabe: "Re: [boost] Boost Modularization: did we get it right?"
Next in thread: Dave Abrahams: "Re: [boost] Boost Modularization: did we get it right?"

On 15/05/2012 16:12, Steven Watanabe wrote:

> Remember also, that copying is a last resort
> fallback if neither sym links nor hard
> links are supported.

Which is unfortunately the case when using a FAT32 file system :(

Next message: Nathan Ridge: "Re: [boost] [fusion] Trouble using BOOST_FUSION_ADAPT_ADT with boost::fusion::operator<"
Previous message: Matthew Chambers: "Re: [boost] [ot] choosing a build system"
In reply to: Steven Watanabe: "Re: [boost] Boost Modularization: did we get it right?"
Next in thread: Dave Abrahams: "Re: [boost] Boost Modularization: did we get it right?"

Date view	Thread view	Subject view	Author view

Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk