openh323-1.9.11.ebuild cannot be used with distcc because it doesn't honour the CXX flag (well, it calls it $CPLUS). Here is a patch that fixes this in the ebuild. Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce:
Created attachment 8031 [details, diff] patch to allow openh323 build to use distcc
The new distcc ebuild that Zach Welch should be releasing soon will have a set of compiler-wrappers that let ebuilds work without changing the CC/CXX variables, so we won't need to patch individual packages for distcc support anymore (hopefully). You'll just need to turn on "distcc" in the FEATURES, upgrade to the latest portage, and it should just work.
well, I tried the distcc flag in FEATURES, and it works for only a subset of packages. The problem here is that firstly openh323 has an unconventional Makefile that uses $(CPLUS) as its C++ compiler rather than $(CXX) as is the norm. So therefore, you really do need this patch in order to get openh323 to compile using distcc, whether you use the distcc feature that zwelch added or not.
You seem to be confusing the portage change (which was not done by Zwelch) and the new distcc ebuild (which was). Just adding distcc to the FEATURES setting without upgrading to the latest (currrently masked) distcc ebuild only gets you part way there, as you discovered. The latest distcc ebuild installs wrappers for gcc/g++/etc., and these don't require the twiddling of any environment variables to make distcc work. The latest portage know about these wrapper symlinks, and updates the PATH to use them rather than playing games with CC and CXX. This neatly bypasses all the problems with programs that either don't use the compiler environement variables, or have problems with them containing multiple words. Give distcc-1.1-r10 a try, and I think you'll find that it works for you. I also recommend the gcc-config 1.3.1 ebuild, which installs gcc/g++/etc. wrappers for the currently-configured gcc profile into /usr/bin, but I don't think that this is required to make this work.
yep. the new distcc-1.1-r8 works for me now (very well, i might add). thanks for looking into this, i think you are correct when you said part of the problem was with my older distcc.
