distcc and wine

Martin Pool mbp at samba.org
Wed Jan 8 17:15:34 CST 2003

On  8 Jan 2003, Dan Kegel <dank at kegel.com> wrote:

> I think the issue was that I did not have three identical machines;
> the speedup from distributing to three hosts was minimal compared
> to just building on the fast machine.

I think the scheduler doesn't handle the case of heterogenous machines
as well as it might.  I'm going to try to fix that.

You should make sure that the fastest machines are listed first in

> Thanks for working on distcc et al!  BTW, is gecc ready for prime
> time yet?

My impression is that it is still experimental, but I don't work on it
so I can't really say.

> Presumably it would be a win over either ccache or distcc?

Integrated distributed caching and compilation is probably best in the
long term.  My approach was to get "small sharp" tools really solid
first before tackling integration -- correctness is more important
than speed.  I've discovered a number of interesting gcc "behaviours"
along the way and they might have been harder to isolate with a more
complex tool.


More information about the wine-devel mailing list