1 |
> If I fully follow that wiki page (I did until the wrapper script is added) I would have to change these links: |
2 |
> |
3 |
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 16 Sep 6 21:35 c++ -> ../../bin/distcc |
4 |
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 16 Sep 6 21:35 cc -> ../../bin/distcc |
5 |
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 16 Sep 6 21:35 g++ -> ../../bin/distcc |
6 |
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 16 Sep 6 21:35 gcc -> ../../bin/distcc |
7 |
|
8 |
That's the idea, although now I can see that this is not your problem. |
9 |
|
10 |
> Yes, i686-pc-linux-gnu-gcc and i686-pc-linux-gnu-g++ are just symbolic links to the native compilers (because I don't have those binaries). |
11 |
|
12 |
This is what's biting you. Distcc is invoking i686-pc-linux-gnu-gcc on a |
13 |
server and is getting back 64-bit output, because the x86_64 compiler is |
14 |
configured to produce 64-bit output by default. |
15 |
|
16 |
> Should I better remove the symbolic links and add scripts there which adds -m32 -march=i686 to the parameter list (I could do it because those compiler names are only used on 'laptop'). |
17 |
|
18 |
You can do that, and it's surely better than mucking with default CFLAGS. |
19 |
Be warned, though, that the components of the native Debian toolchain |
20 |
probably are not the same version as those on your laptop. This might |
21 |
expose you to random runtime breakage which will be quite hard to |
22 |
diagnose, especially in case of different glibc versions. |
23 |
|
24 |
This is the main reason why a dedicated toolchain is recommended. |
25 |
|
26 |
> So CFLAGS and HOSTCFLAGS must be set to the same in make.conf? It is really confusing. :( |
27 |
|
28 |
Unless you are doing strange things you should never need to touch your |
29 |
HOSTCFLAGS. In your case i think it would simply be better to fix your |
30 |
setup :) |
31 |
|
32 |
andrea |