Re: [boost] Increase in binary size

2003-03-11 Thread Douglas Gregor
On Monday 03 March 2003 10:03 am, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > I see that when upgrading LyX to use the upcomming 1.30.0 release > instead of the 1.29.0 release our binary size increases by more than > 125kB... > > I have not tried to figure out where that increase comes from, but the > usual suspe

Re: [boost] Increase in binary size

2003-03-04 Thread Lars Gullik Bjønnes
Beman Dawes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | At 10:03 AM 3/3/2003, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: | | >I see that when upgrading LyX to use the upcomming 1.30.0 release | >instead of the 1.29.0 release our binary size increases by more than | >125kB... | | Not sure what goes into your "binary size".

Re: [boost] Increase in binary size

2003-03-04 Thread Beman Dawes
At 10:03 AM 3/3/2003, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: >I see that when upgrading LyX to use the upcomming 1.30.0 release >instead of the 1.29.0 release our binary size increases by more than >125kB... Not sure what goes into your "binary size". Does that include source code, tests, examples, and docs?

Re: [boost] Increase in binary size

2003-03-04 Thread John Maddock
> I have not tried to figure out where that increase comes from, but the > usual suspecs are regex, function and signal since that is what we use > most. It shouldn't be regex: there have been a couple of minor patches and a reorganization of the header directory structure, but no significant chan

[boost] Increase in binary size

2003-03-03 Thread Lars Gullik Bjønnes
I see that when upgrading LyX to use the upcomming 1.30.0 release instead of the 1.29.0 release our binary size increases by more than 125kB... I have not tried to figure out where that increase comes from, but the usual suspecs are regex, function and signal since that is what we use most. The