On Sat, 1 Nov 2008 14:58:39 -0700
Gordon Malm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I use madwifi-ng extensively and have experienced the same issue with 
> madwifi-ng as stated in that bug.  For bug #167844, please read
> comment #13 and http://code.google.com/p/distcc/issues/detail?id=25.
> There's nothing to fix, hardened is doing the right thing as is
> distcc.  The proper approach is to not distribute compiles of kernel
> modules.

It looks to me like hardened is doing entirely the wrong thing. Thus,
the proper fix is to make hardened behave itself.

> To not get too stuck on a single scenario, I think this would be a
> useful feature and desireable vs. the alternative of
> This is not the first time its been requested, a simple search
> reveals bugs #28300, #80894.

It looks a lot like people are blaming distcc for parallelisation bugs
that aren't distcc related but that happen to be easier to reproduce
when distcc is enabled. Do you have any examples of problems that are
definitely caused by distcc, rather than general parallelisation bugs
or user misconfigurations? RESTRICTing distcc doesn't seem to be an
actual fix for anything...

Ciaran McCreesh

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to