On 12 Dec 2002, Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Nov 12, 2002, Martin Pool <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > 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. > > The reason is that GCC used to use the same compiler driver and specs > file for multiple versions of gcc, under the assumption that the > interface of the actual compiler (cc1, cpp, etc) wouldn't change.
Thanks for the explanation. Does this sound like reasonable advice? http://distcc.samba.org/manual/html/distcc-2.html#ss2.10 -- Martin _______________________________________________ distcc mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.samba.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/distcc
