On 12 Nov 2002, Michael Santy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In reading through the newsgroups, I have seen how many people have > requested version matching with gcc. Instead of querying the version of > gcc installed every time, you are able to pass it -V to request a > specific version of the compiler. If that specific version does not > exist, gcc returns an error. > > For example (outside of distcc), if I have gcc 3.1 installed and execute > the command: > gcc -V 2.95 -c foo.c > I get the error: > gcc: installation problem, cannot exec 'cc1': No such file or directory > However, if I execute: > gcc -V 3.1 -c foo.c > All is happy.
I've since been informed that it's better to use a different name for gcc, because -V doesn't work completely reliably. I'm not sure of the exact reason. For example distcc gcc-3.2-x86-linux -c foo.c > This is a way to assume all of the distccd hosts have the correct > version of gcc, and if they do not, distcc will fall back on the > localhost. This is an easy way to be safe if you are compiling c++, > which has the potential to produce mismatched abi object files when > using different versions of gcc. I'm not sure if this should be handled > by the user of distcc or distcc itself. You can do this by putting it in your CXXFLAGS. If necessary, an autoconf test could find out the appropriate values. -- Martin _______________________________________________ distcc mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.samba.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/distcc
