From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31821 invoked by alias); 2 Oct 2002 06:25:14 -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 31758 invoked from network); 2 Oct 2002 06:25:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO molenda.com) (192.220.74.81) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 2 Oct 2002 06:25:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 71955 invoked by uid 19025); 2 Oct 2002 06:23:39 -0000 Date: Tue, 01 Oct 2002 23:25:00 -0000 From: Jason Molenda To: Keith Seitz Cc: Jim Ingham , Andrew Cagney , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [patch rfa:doco rfc:NEWS] mi1 -> mi2; rm mi0 Message-ID: <20021001232339.A71134@molenda.com> References: <70563052-D58F-11D6-BB61-00039379E320@apple.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: ; from keiths@redhat.com on Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 04:42:28PM -0700 X-SW-Source: 2002-10/txt/msg00044.txt.bz2 On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 04:42:28PM -0700, Keith Seitz wrote: > >[...] > Apple, who has done a lot of work on gdb and MI; no doubt fixed a lot of > stuff, but only managed to "submit" a giant distribution tarball of their > modified GDB. I wouldn't be too suprised if some thought that Apple was > taking advantage of the public's work. Mind you, I'm not saying that any > of this is true, but I wouldn't be suprised if some one reading this list > felt that way. > This is definitely off-topic and I should just let it go... But this isn't a fair representation of reality. I think Keith knows it, and I think all the gdb folks who know Jim know it. The gdb group at Apple is not large and has had tremendous struggles to get gdb working correctly for its developers on the MacOS X platform -- there has been literally no time left over. Apple management is very supportive of moving our fixes, enhancements and changes to the FSF as much as possible -- as anyone would sensibly be -- but it's a simple matter of not having the time to make it happen so far. As for the source dump, you know very well that Andrew asked for that, and I provided it right away. (Incidentally, I'm not one of these hard-working Apple gdb programmers, and even I couldn't find time to make up the original tarball until a weekend.) I think you can see Apple's committment to working with the free software community in gcc more easily -- we've got more people working on the compiler there and it is an obvious priority to participate in the compiler's development and enhancement. The compiler and debugger groups are under the same management structure - they're clued in that this is a necessary way to operate in the long term. Back in the day, Cygnus was periodically flamed for being evil software hoarders by various unclueful people because we weren't releasing our local changes in the timeframe or manner that the flamers wanted us to. Keith, you should know better. Jason