[distcc] Re: Distcc & GDB (fix)

Martin Pool mbp at sourcefrog.net
Sun May 11 01:19:37 GMT 2003

On 10 May 2003, Thomas Walker <Thomas.Walker at morganstanley.com> wrote:

> Thank you very much, I'll take a look at the patch and see what I
> can do...  I certainly realize that Redhat and the GCC guys are very
> different (but overlapping) groups.  I just figured it couldn't hurt
> to try pushing a little harder in a place that I have access to to
> see if this behavior could be fixed.  I would gather that, although
> Redhat does not have any direct control over gcc (or any other fsf
> project) that they do have some (slight) influence over the bug
> report/feature request end of things (I've had moderate success with
> glibc issues thus far through them). It does, afterall, seem
> ridiculous that the source directory is not picked up in a place
> where it is more or less guaranteed to be accurate at the cost of a
> few extra bytes in the .i file (which is generally then immediately
> discarded...)

Thankyou for your efforts.  

The workaround Thomas mentioned earlier, of using the complete
filename, is not quite as good as a proper fix, because it means that
the correct file can't be found if the source directory is later

Regardless of distcc, embedding the compiler pwd is a pretty ugly way
to record where the source directory is, and I would hope the gcc
maintainers would fix it for this reason.


More information about the distcc mailing list