From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4786 invoked by alias); 2 Oct 2003 13:44:54 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 4774 invoked from network); 2 Oct 2003 13:44:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO redhat.com) (66.187.230.200) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 2 Oct 2003 13:44:54 -0000 Received: by redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 201) id 99EA732A8A7; Thu, 2 Oct 2003 09:44:52 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2003 13:44:00 -0000 From: Christopher Faylor To: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Using gdb with Borland's free compiler? Message-ID: <20031002134452.GA32402@redhat.com> Mail-Followup-To: gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <200309282250.h8SMorcf026975@duracef.shout.net> <3F783251.2030009@redhat.com> <3F7A053B.9060502@cybertec.com.au> <3F7AE95C.5020108@redhat.com> <3F7B9F28.4020103@cybertec.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3F7B9F28.4020103@cybertec.com.au> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-10/txt/msg00057.txt.bz2 On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 01:44:40PM +1000, Chris Johns wrote: >Andrew Cagney wrote: >>It might be prudent to not look at the existing patch too hard. You'll >>need to be able to sign a document stating that what you contribute is >>your own work .... > >I do not know the Win32 API so makes this a little more effort than I >can spare. I have asked about ths history of the patch on the MinGW >list. > >>Alternatively, you could use this list as an audit trail and explain >>what needs to be done. > >Not sure I understand what you mean. Is a list of the current patch >changes ok ? > >I was planing on breaking down the patch and sending them to the gdb >patches list. You can't really do that unless you are the author of the patches, though. cgf