From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10223 invoked by alias); 10 May 2002 18:33:22 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 10159 invoked from network); 10 May 2002 18:33:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cygnus.com) (205.180.83.203) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 10 May 2002 18:33:20 -0000 Received: from localhost.redhat.com (remus.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.252]) by runyon.cygnus.com (8.8.7-cygnus/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA26235 for ; Fri, 10 May 2002 11:33:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 469) id 4BCE910AAC; Fri, 10 May 2002 14:32:44 -0400 (EDT) From: Elena Zannoni MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15580.4684.15726.307469@localhost.redhat.com> Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 11:33:00 -0000 To: Michael Elizabeth Chastain Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, petrs@caldera.com Subject: Re: [RFH] F95 expression parser In-Reply-To: <200205101827.g4AIRu913183@duracef.shout.net> References: <200205101827.g4AIRu913183@duracef.shout.net> X-SW-Source: 2002-05/txt/msg00354.txt.bz2 Michael Elizabeth Chastain writes: > > 1) Should I submit it first to FSF for approval? I assume so. > > Yes, but there seems to be some confusion here. Sending work to > "gdb-patches" is the way you send it to the FSF. > > > 2) Should a separate branch be created for the F95 support? > > Currently I don't think this is necessary. > > I don't think so either, because it's not going to break any > existing code (including F77 code). > > Michael C Maybe look at the gdb-patches archives for how Pierre Muller sumitted Pascal support? That went pretty smooth. Elena