Re: [boost] [modular boost] non-linked headers

Subject: Re: [boost] [modular boost] non-linked headers
From: Edward Diener (eldiener_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-12-02 22:42:01

On 12/2/2013 9:02 PM, Edward Diener wrote:
> On 12/2/2013 8:06 PM, Bjørn Roald wrote:
>> On 12/03/2013 01:48 AM, Daniel James wrote:
>>> On 3 December 2013 00:32, Bjørn Roald <bjorn_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>>> not sure I understood exactly what you refer to, but I did just test
>>>> command
>>>> line concatenation, emacs, gedit, vim.  All of them seem to change
>>>> the file
>>>> as I expected.  What programs do you have in mind?
>>>
>>> Git for a start. If you check out a different version of a header it
>>> will break the link.
>>
>> In that case we should use symlinks for sure.  The problem here is that
>> the dependency in b2 for the link should catch this in the build, but
>> not if the date stamp move in the wrong direction. IBM cleamake solves
>> this in clearcase views, but we do not have that build tool.  Using
>> filetime "greater than" to detect dependency changes is a fundamentally
>> broken hack used by almost all build tools.
>>
>> As far as I remember symlinks to files are not Supported on windows
>> prior to Vista, how much of a concern should that be?  I guess copies
>> are annoying for XP hosts, but not as devious as I see hardlinks could
>> be.
>
> I do not use XP any longer but there is a driver for symbolic links
> under Windows XP. See
> http://schinagl.priv.at/nt/hardlinkshellext/hardlinkshellext.html#symboliclinksforwindowsxp.

Unfortunately it seems that there would still be no command-line support 
for symbolic links under Windows XP even with the driver mentioned.