On Oct 10, 2002, Martin Pool <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The problem is that in this context distcc incorrectly thinks the .S > file is the name of the compiler.
And it couldn't possibly tell otherwise should the .S file be executable. One more reason to prefer explicit compiler names. (Not that I'm against the convenience of being able to omit it, I just don't take this risk myself) -- Alexandre Oliva Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/ Red Hat GCC Developer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org} CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org} Free Software Evangelist Professional serial bug killer _______________________________________________ distcc mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.samba.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/distcc
