From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 41419 invoked by alias); 13 Feb 2019 14:47:38 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 41405 invoked by uid 89); 13 Feb 2019 14:47:38 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=administration, company, delayed, Manager X-HELO: mail-wr1-f68.google.com Received: from mail-wr1-f68.google.com (HELO mail-wr1-f68.google.com) (209.85.221.68) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 13 Feb 2019 14:47:37 +0000 Received: by mail-wr1-f68.google.com with SMTP id c8so2807245wrs.4 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2019 06:47:37 -0800 (PST) Return-Path: Received: from ?IPv6:2001:8a0:f913:f700:75e6:857f:3506:a1f4? ([2001:8a0:f913:f700:75e6:857f:3506:a1f4]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f22sm4439724wmj.26.2019.02.13.06.47.34 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 13 Feb 2019 06:47:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [PATCH] review request: implementing DW_AT_endianity To: Peeter Joot , Tom Tromey References: <20171010233010.58471-1-peeter.joot@lzlabs.com> <87371tq6uz.fsf@tromey.com> <87sgwr6de7.fsf@tromey.com> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Peeter Joot , Simon Marchi From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2019 14:47:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2019-02/txt/msg00183.txt.bz2 On 02/13/2019 02:11 PM, Peeter Joot wrote: >> Hi! What is the status of this? I'm still interested in getting this >> patch into gdb. >> > > Hi Tom, > > FSF legal is essentially unresponsive about the contribution paperwork that > we submitted (Oct 2017.) > > We last heard from the FSF Licensing & Compliance Manager August 31st last > year, who stated they were hiring a new administrator, and asked for some > time to review. Our company legal asked if we could provide any additional > information to help things along Oct 1st last year, and again Jan 14th this > year -- I don't believe we received any reply from the FSF. I'm very sorry to hear that. I'll get in touch with the FSF, see if we can help unblock this. In my experience copyright assignments are pretty quick nowadays, except that last year the FSF went through that administration change, which unfortunately delayed things. > > The delays were so extensive that we've opted to use lldb as our backend > debugger, and have started contributing changes to the lldb/clang/llvm > stack instead. That said, if the FSF does process our contribution > paperwork, it is still my intention to rebase my changes against > binutils/LATEST and submit a patch. Thanks, Pedro Alves