From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27422 invoked by alias); 30 Aug 2005 02:16:12 -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 26483 invoked by uid 22791); 30 Aug 2005 02:16:08 -0000 Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Tue, 30 Aug 2005 02:16:08 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.52) id 1E9vfS-0004Ac-CO; Mon, 29 Aug 2005 22:16:06 -0400 Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 02:16:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Steve Underwood Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: New target support for GDB Message-ID: <20050830021606.GA15990@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Steve Underwood , gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <430C9B45.6030101@coppice.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <430C9B45.6030101@coppice.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-SW-Source: 2005-08/txt/msg00121.txt.bz2 On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 12:07:33AM +0800, Steve Underwood wrote: > Hi, > > Support for the Texas Instruments MSP430 made its way into the main > binutils CVS some time ago. I kept letting the GDB support slip behind > the current changes, but now I am making a push to bring it up to date, > and get it into the main CVS. I have code that seems to work with this > week's GDB snaphot (6.3.50.20050822), though it needs more testing and > polishing before it is merged. I want to sort out the procedural stuff > in parallel with completing the code. > > I understand I need to complete an FSF form, to contribute the code. I'm > not sure which form, or where I need to send it. I looked on the GNU > site, but there are a number of procedures for different circumstances. > I'd like to clarify the appropriate one. I don't know the procedure for > delivering the code, cleaning up anything which it not considered > appropriate, etc. Also, I don't know who the coordinator is, who would > deal with this. > > Can someone help me? I'll take care of this off-list. > We still need to get support into the main GCC repository. Once the GDB > stuff is in place, I will try to push the compiler stuff forward. We've > had solid support for GCC 3.2.3 since that was a new version. Again, we > haven't made the necessary push to catch up with changes to the compiler > core, and get our stuff merged. Now seems like a good time. FWIW, I would recommend getting the compiler port contributed before the GDB port, so that the GDB port can be properly tested... -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery, LLC