[distcc] distcc, cross-compilers & packages that ignore CC/CXX... what's the _right_ way?

[Stuart Longland]

Dan Kegel wrote:
> On 1/23/06, Andrew Gaffney <agaffney at gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
>>>Fix the broken packages and send the fixes upstream.
>>>That's what I do.
>>
>>And for dead, slow, incompetent, or otherwise uncooperative upstreams? I don't
>>think that's what he had in mind.
> 
> I still try to fix 'em right and make the patches available.

Yeah... while this should be the ultimate solution, sometimes this isn't
practical.  Maintaining a patch against the build system because a
hostile upstream doesn't want to include it is no fun.

It also doesn't work for 3rd party packages, which is why I'm looking
for another solution.

But yes, I see your point. :-)

> I know what you mean, though.  Python, for instance,
> is incredibly difficult to cross-compile, partly because
> they ditched autoconf and replaced it with a setup script
> written in Python that had to be executed by the same Python
> you're trying to build.   That knot took me a month to unsnarl.
> Fortunately, Guido works near me, I think I can shame him
> into fixing that...

Ouch... chicken-and-egg problem anyone?  That's something that
definately should be looked at.  (but not relevant to distcc ;-)
-- 
Stuart Longland (aka Redhatter)              .'''.
Gentoo Linux/MIPS Cobalt and Docs Developer  '.'` :
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   .'.'
http://dev.gentoo.org/~redhatter             :.'
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 256 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/distcc/attachments/20060124/161b82df/signature.bin