On Dec 12, 2002, Claes Wallin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 12, 2002 at 08:19:12PM +1100, Martin Pool wrote: >> Thanks for the explanation. Does this sound like reasonable advice? >> >> http://distcc.samba.org/manual/html/distcc-2.html#ss2.10
> Excerpt from link: >> If you build gcc from source, you should use the --program-suffix >> configuration options to cause it to be installed with a name that >> encodes the gcc version and the target platform, such as gcc-3.2 or >> gcc-3.2-arm. > Wouldn't it be better to use the standard naming for cross-compilers, > i.e along the lines of "i686-linux-gcc-3.2", instead of introducing an > arbitrary naming scheme? I believe so. GCC 3.3 is going to install itself as <target>-gcc-<version>, in addition to <target>-gcc and, if it's native, gcc-<version> and gcc. -- 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
