--- Martin Pool <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > OK. If I can think of a way to do it that does not > break > compatibility too much I'll do it shortly, otherwise > it might need to > wait just a little. (Or perhaps be not on by > default.)
Not a problem. I found a quick band-aid that I'm testing now (making gcc emit a comment to the top of all source files). I just tested Intel cc, Sun cc and DEC (well, now HP) cc, and all emit stuff for empty sourcefiles, so it looks like Darwin's in the distinct minority for now! > If you see many in Connecting, Sending or Receiving > then that may mean > that your network is overloaded. I'll give that a shot, and report back soon. Given that I'm also sending assembly, not binary files, I imagine that'd increase the network hit too. > > Therefore on 10Mbp/s you can only remotely compile > about one file per > second. If you're building complex programs on > medium-slow machine > they might take 4s per file, so at 4 machines or > less the network will > be saturated. I hadn't considered that. I should try compiling KDE for a change :-) GCC doesn't stress things enough... > > Compression may or may not help there. That's a good point. I vaguely recall a lzo compression patch floating around. What did happen with that? > > Some friends are using distcc on a 1Gb/s network, > and they benefit > from up to 24 remote CPUs. (It's not a linear > improvement because of > makefile inefficiencies, but there is an > improvement.) Right. I did a -j16 build of the kernel once, and noticed exactly the same thing (with a faster network). Thanks, Dara __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com __ distcc mailing list http://distcc.samba.org/ To unsubscribe or change options: http://lists.samba.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/distcc
