Am Montag 17 August 2009 schrieb Kornel Benko:
> at least "do_assign" is not defined in our .cpp files.
> (Declared in header file it is)
Hmmm, sorry, there is a template in the header too, but maybe not used?
Kornel
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Am Montag 17 August 2009 schrieb Peter Kümmel:
> Andre Poenitz wrote:
> >> What were the reasons at the last meeting not to drop boost?
> >
> > Using tr1 turned out not to be a drop-in replacement.
>
> I've updated to boost 1.39 and tested on Linux and Windows.
>
> I get a strange lyxclient linker
Andre Poenitz wrote:
>> What were the reasons at the last meeting not to drop boost?
>
> Using tr1 turned out not to be a drop-in replacement.
>
I've updated to boost 1.39 and tested on Linux and Windows.
I get a strange lyxclient linker error when building with cmake,
Kornel do you have an ide
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 01:03:30PM +0200, Vincent van Ravesteijn - TNW
wrote:
>
> > But why do we still use boost?
> my memory is fading away, but wasn't there some compilation
> problems when we tried to replace something with tr1 in berlin?
> >>> I don't know, Andre started workin
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 12:49:28PM +0200, Peter Kümmel wrote:
> Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> >> Is it ok when I update without a branch?
> >
> > Yes.
> >
>
> OK, when I have commit rights I will update and test on Linux.
>
> >> This means I will commit without testing on Linux before commiting
> But why do we still use boost?
my memory is fading away, but wasn't there some
compilation problems when we tried to replace something
with tr1 in berlin?
>>> I don't know, Andre started working on this but then he
>>> stopped.
>>
>> in my memory someone with win compiler sta
Peter Kümmel wrote:
>
> What's also new now, is the possibility to use an extenal boost lib, so we
> have always
> boost::tr1 as fallback for systems/GCCs which do not support tr1 properly.
>
I think about of removing boost instead of updating.
Peter
Pavel Sanda wrote:
> Peter Kümmel wrote:
>> Christian will crreate the account, but I don't know If he as already done,
>> atm I cant commit.
>>
>> Will it work by simply checking out as anon, and then to commit on this
>> checkout?
>
> you make anon checkout. then for the first commit svn will a
Peter Kümmel wrote:
> Christian will crreate the account, but I don't know If he as already done,
> atm I cant commit.
>
> Will it work by simply checking out as anon, and then to commit on this
> checkout?
you make anon checkout. then for the first commit svn will ask you for pass and
store it
Pavel Sanda wrote:
> Peter Kümmel wrote:
>> Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
Is it ok when I update without a branch?
>>> Yes.
>>>
>> OK, when I have commit rights I will update and test on Linux.
>
> ask JMarc, who is able to resurrect old accounts.
Christian will crreate the account, but I don'
Peter Kümmel wrote:
> Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> >> Is it ok when I update without a branch?
> >
> > Yes.
> >
>
> OK, when I have commit rights I will update and test on Linux.
ask JMarc, who is able to resurrect old accounts.
> But why do we still use boost?
my memory is fading away, but
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
>> Is it ok when I update without a branch?
>
> Yes.
>
OK, when I have commit rights I will update and test on Linux.
>> This means I will commit without testing on Linux before commiting,
>> only Windows. (But I don't see why it should not work on Linux)
>>
>> Does
On 15/08/2009 10:39, Peter Kümmel wrote:
Do we still plan to update boost?
Yes.
I've a update to 1.39 in the pipeline:
see attached output of svn status.
When committing I will add the file with '?'.
Is it ok when I update without a branch?
Yes.
This means I will commit without t
Do we still plan to update boost?
I've a update to 1.39 in the pipeline:
see attached output of svn status.
When committing I will add the file with '?'.
Is it ok when I update without a branch?
This means I will commit without testing on Linux before commiting,
only Windows. (But I don't see why
14 matches
Mail list logo
