Only the hosts after --randomize are randomized, I think.
True, but I still second Victor's point of view. The host file contains hosts, and adding options there doesn't sound good at all. Not that I have an immediate idea to implement the "not all hosts are randomized" concept, but at least I can say I don't much like this one.
Me neither, but we wuz in a hurry :-)
I would also question the interest of such an option. Was there a significant improvement when compared with a fully randomized distribution? I would think that a more simple rule would be not to randomize the first host of the list and start randomizing after that. Wouldn't it be sufficient?
Any number of approaches would do. I didn't want to force randomization down anyone's throat, so I made it an option.
Or we could have ~/.distcc/hosts.random for randomized hosts.
Nah, let's not have two hosts lists.
I'd kind of like to see a nice C implementation of the
load balancing proxy server, myself... that would get
rid of the need for this option.
__ distcc mailing list http://distcc.samba.org/
To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/distcc
