> If I fully follow that wiki page (I did until the wrapper script is added) I would have to change these links:
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 16 Sep 6 21:35 c++ -> ../../bin/distcc
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 16 Sep 6 21:35 cc -> ../../bin/distcc
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 16 Sep 6 21:35 g++ -> ../../bin/distcc
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 16 Sep 6 21:35 gcc -> ../../bin/distcc
That's the idea, although now I can see that this is not your problem.
> Yes, i686-pc-linux-gnu-gcc and i686-pc-linux-gnu-g++ are just symbolic links to the native compilers (because I don't have those binaries).
This is what's biting you. Distcc is invoking i686-pc-linux-gnu-gcc on a
server and is getting back 64-bit output, because the x86_64 compiler is
configured to produce 64-bit output by default.
> Should I better remove the symbolic links and add scripts there which adds -m32 -march=i686 to the parameter list (I could do it because those compiler names are only used on 'laptop').
You can do that, and it's surely better than mucking with default CFLAGS.
Be warned, though, that the components of the native Debian toolchain
probably are not the same version as those on your laptop. This might
expose you to random runtime breakage which will be quite hard to
diagnose, especially in case of different glibc versions.
This is the main reason why a dedicated toolchain is recommended.
> So CFLAGS and HOSTCFLAGS must be set to the same in make.conf? It is really confusing.
Unless you are doing strange things you should never need to touch your
HOSTCFLAGS. In your case i think it would simply be better to fix your