Re: Can't compile C++ code

hi,

On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 12:57 AM, Martin Pool <[email protected]> wrote:

> Try using CC='distcc g++' or add -xc++ to the compiler options.
>
> In general I think running
>
>  gcc -c thing.cc
>
> will compile it correctly, because the filename (and then the
> explicitly given language option) have higher priority than the name
> you used for the compiler.


Yes, with -c it always works perfectly, even if the code is C or C++.


> The only exception as I recall, is if you
> want a file thing.c compiled as C++ without giving an option to say
> so.


That's not my case.


>
> If distcc is run as, say
>
>  distcc -o prog thing.o wibble.o
>
> how's it supposed to know you want them linked as C++,


I don't know, that's why I'm asking this question :(


> and if run as
>
>  distcc -c thing.c
>
> how's it supposed to know you want it compiled as C++?


That's not my case. [2]

I thought that using distcc should be as simple as changing the compiler
from gcc/g++ (both of them) to distcc, in the Makefile (aside the distcc
configuration, daemon, etc). But it turned out that way won't work... your
solution of using 'CC=distcc CXX="distcc g++" actually works, but this is
not my ideal solution. CMake, for example, won't accept "distcc g++" as the
compiler command, it only accepts one binary file/command. Maybe there
should be two commands, like "distcc" and "distc++", and I would specify
those commands as the new compilers. If "cc" alone can't handle every
compilation, "distcc" alone shouldn't too...

-- 
Crístian Deives dos Santos Viana [aka CD1]

__ 
distcc mailing list            http://distcc.samba.org/
To unsubscribe or change options: 
https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/distcc