[distcc] gcc bootstraps with distcc

[Alexandre Oliva]

On Jul 11, 2003, Neil Booth <neil@daikokuya.co.uk> wrote:

> You know what I like, but dismissed it as "unacceptable".

You want extensions to cover that.  See Mike Stump's e-mail in this
thread.  You'd defeat the feature.

>> +      _cpp_do_file_change (pfile, LC_RENAME, dir_with_slashes, 1, 0);
>> +      _cpp_do_file_change (pfile, LC_RENAME, name, 1, 0);
>> +    }

> Is the second rename necessary?  I don't see why it should be;
> if not let's not do it.

AFAICT, yes.  Without it, -E -fpreprocessed is not equivalent to
`cat'.

> This is really horrible.  cb.dir_change should return void, things about
> "too late" are no concern of cpplib.

So, no error if one tries to set it more than once?  No error if it's
set too late?  Or just print the error elsewhere, and not let cpplib
know about it?

>> - %{M} %{MM} %{MF*} %{MG} %{MP} %{MQ*} %{MT*}\
>> + %{M} %{MM} %{MF*} %{MG} %{MP} %{Mpwd} %{MQ*} %{MT*}\

> Is there a good reason for this?  If not, let's go with -fpwd as
> default and -fno-pwd.

Hmm...  I'm thinking the internal cpp option for this should be not
-gpwd, but rather -dP, since it affects the preprocessor's output like
other -d options.  We would then use %{!gno-pwd:%{g*:-dD}} in the
preprocessor's spec.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva   Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC Developer                 aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp        oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist                Professional serial bug killer