1 |
On Sunday 03 April 2005 11:35, Stuart Longland wrote: |
2 |
> Andrew de Quincey wrote: |
3 |
> > On Sunday 03 April 2005 03:10, Andrew Gaffney wrote: |
4 |
> >>Andrew de Quincey wrote: |
5 |
> >>>Hi, I hope this is the correct place to send this. |
6 |
> >>> |
7 |
> >>>I have setup distcc in my network. Most of the hosts are i686, but one |
8 |
> >>> of them is x86_64. I wish to distribute tasks to the i686 machines from |
9 |
> >>> the x86_64 machine. This involves installing a cross compiler on the |
10 |
> >>> i686 machines for x86_64 tasks. Crossdev is overkill for this - I don't |
11 |
> >>> actually _need_ glibc and the like on the client machines for a simple |
12 |
> >>> distcc environment. It really adds to the upgrade time when emerge |
13 |
> >>> sync; emerge worlding. |
14 |
> >> |
15 |
> >>crossdev -s1 -t <x86_64 CHOST> |
16 |
> > |
17 |
> > According to the docs, that doesn't compile a c++ compiler: |
18 |
> > |
19 |
> > -s1, --stage1 Build a C compiler (no libc/C++) |
20 |
> |
21 |
> And guess what... no libc... no c++. If you require a C++ compiler, |
22 |
> then might I suggest making a µClibc-based toolchain? µClibc is just a |
23 |
> little smaller than it's GNU cousin, and so shouldn't occupy much space. |
24 |
|
25 |
I have it running right now with *no* libc and g++. There is no reason to need |
26 |
a libc, apart from the fact that you cannot confiure g++ to build without |
27 |
patching it. I have just distcc compiled kdlibs with this configuration. |
28 |
|
29 |
Have you actually tried the patch? This is precisely what it does - g++ with |
30 |
no libc. |
31 |
|
32 |
The files installed with the patch are in the attached file. I could perhaps |
33 |
trim it more - there is no need for the include files either with distcc. |