Re: [gentoo-dev] [PMS] Add RESTRICT=distcc capability

2008-11-03 Thread Peter Volkov
В Вск, 02/11/2008 в 12:11 -0700, Gordon Malm пишет: You can cry abuse all you want. You FAIL to offer any alternatives or solutions. I'll ask again, how do you detect that you are compiling code destined to be run in-kernel from within gcc without checking for the __KERNEL__ macro? I

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PMS] Add RESTRICT=distcc capability

2008-11-03 Thread Gordon Malm
On Monday, November 3, 2008 02:22:12 Peter Volkov wrote: В Вск, 02/11/2008 в 12:11 -0700, Gordon Malm пишет: You can cry abuse all you want. You FAIL to offer any alternatives or solutions. I'll ask again, how do you detect that you are compiling code destined to be run in-kernel from

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PMS] Add RESTRICT=distcc capability

2008-11-02 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Sat, 1 Nov 2008 18:29:03 -0700 Gordon Malm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You're the one assuming the only purpose would be to mask parallel make problems. Apparently it does have a purpose though since avidemux builds fine in parallel but NOT via distcc. Have you conclusively established that

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PMS] Add RESTRICT=distcc capability

2008-11-02 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Sun, 2 Nov 2008 12:11:10 -0700 Gordon Malm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Have you conclusively established that they do build fine in parallel? If so, how? And why do they break in parallel only under distcc? Given how distcc works, this strikes me as somewhat implausible... Yes it builds

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PMS] Add RESTRICT=distcc capability

2008-11-01 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Sat, 1 Nov 2008 13:57:17 -0700 Gordon Malm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But in the case of out-of-tree kernel modules the idea of distributing compile jobs to other machines is fundamentally flawed IMO. Why? And how are out of tree kernel modules in any way special when it comes to distcc? --

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PMS] Add RESTRICT=distcc capability

2008-11-01 Thread Gordon Malm
If you're compiling an out-of-tree module that requires the kernel be compiled with support for a particular item and the distccd host's kernel does not have that support compiles fail. Reference bug #120001 (though I know that it was properly diagnosed there). Then there's also this doozie.

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PMS] Add RESTRICT=distcc capability

2008-11-01 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Sat, 1 Nov 2008 14:21:43 -0700 Gordon Malm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you're compiling an out-of-tree module that requires the kernel be compiled with support for a particular item and the distccd host's kernel does not have that support compiles fail. Reference bug #120001 (though I know

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PMS] Add RESTRICT=distcc capability

2008-11-01 Thread Gordon Malm
On Saturday, November 1, 2008 14:28:06 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Sat, 1 Nov 2008 14:21:43 -0700 Gordon Malm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you're compiling an out-of-tree module that requires the kernel be compiled with support for a particular item and the distccd host's kernel does not

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PMS] Add RESTRICT=distcc capability

2008-11-01 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
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

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PMS] Add RESTRICT=distcc capability

2008-11-01 Thread Gordon Malm
On Saturday, November 1, 2008 15:11:16 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: 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

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PMS] Add RESTRICT=distcc capability

2008-11-01 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Sat, 1 Nov 2008 15:47:09 -0700 Gordon Malm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It looks to me like hardened is doing entirely the wrong thing. Thus, the proper fix is to make hardened behave itself. It looks to me like you've already made up your mind. How is hardened doing the entirely wrong

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PMS] Add RESTRICT=distcc capability

2008-11-01 Thread Jan Kundrát
Gordon Malm wrote: It looks to me like you've already made up your mind. How is hardened doing the entirely wrong thing? From the page [1] you mentioned: If so, that seems to me like an abuse of the -D option. The abuse is in changing the compiler behavior based on -D options. What do you

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PMS] Add RESTRICT=distcc capability

2008-11-01 Thread David Leverton
On Saturday 01 November 2008 20:57:17 Gordon Malm wrote: I'd like to get distcc added as one of the FEATURES we are able to RESTRICT. Regardless of whether it's a good idea or not, does it fix all the known issues if the ebuild sets DISTCC_HOSTS=localhost in the environment?

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PMS] Add RESTRICT=distcc capability

2008-11-01 Thread Gordon Malm
On Saturday, November 1, 2008 15:57:52 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: Parallel building problems can often and should be addressed properly. I don't want the answer to every one that comes along to be to add RESTRICT=distcc. This is something to be addressed through developer documentation that

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PMS] Add RESTRICT=distcc capability

2008-11-01 Thread Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Gordon Malm wrote: snip a lot of exchanges All the technical discussion on the above is perfectly fine, but the way the arguments are being presented and the tone used by both sides is getting arguments into a thin line from becoming flames. Please