From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23308 invoked by alias); 8 Dec 2001 23:27:29 -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 23285 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2001 23:27:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.cygnus.com) (216.138.202.10) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 8 Dec 2001 23:27:26 -0000 Received: from cygnus.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.cygnus.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2E6A3D60; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 15:27:20 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <3C12A1D8.7060106@cygnus.com> Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2001 15:27:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:0.9.6) Gecko/20011207 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Paul Hilfinger Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: More code code dropping References: <20011129005901.A60085@molenda.com> <200112070641.WAA01521@localhost.localdomain> <3C10E0F3.2010607@cygnus.com> <3C10E386.2070809@cygnus.com> <20011208081530.BC4D8F28C6@nile.gnat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2001-12/txt/msg00099.txt.bz2 > Folks, > > In discussing with Andrew Cagney the proper procedure for depositing ACT's > Ada-related changes to GDB, I raised the question of what the most useful > patch would be (or if it matters). Inasmuch as ACT's current GDB sources > are derived from the GDB 5.0 release from spring 2000, last re-merged > in September 2000, I thought that a diff against the gdb 5.0 release > was probably most useful. Andrew had suggested a patch against the > latest, bleeding-edge changes. Since the idea of a diff is to give the > curious some idea of our changes, it seemed to me that the latter diff would > show mostly undoings of more recent changes to GDB. If anyone else out > there has an opinion on this subject, I'd like to hear it. Valid point. Apple handled this by putting up both an older stable release and a current snap. Anyway, regardless of how it is done, I think the main objective is to just get Act's GDB changes contributed to the FSF. That way they can be merged in. enjoy, Andrew