SuperH patch contributions

SuperH patch contributions

[Joern Rennecke]

I am leaving SuperH, and on October the first, I am going to start with
my new employment at ST Microelectronics.  I expect to continue to work
on the SH gcc port there.  I have spoken with my manager
(here at SuperH) what best to do with the current SuperH local patches,
and we agreed that the best course of action is to post them on the
gcc-patches / gdb-patches mailing lists.
Our blanket copyright assignment on file with the FSF assigns copyright
in changes and/or enhancements to the programs gcc, g++, gdb,
binutils, libg++, libstdc++, dejagnu, GNU C++ testsuite and GNU C
testsuite submitted by SuperH, Inc.
Thus, by submitting these patches, the copyright assignment becomes
effective for them.
There will be some overlap between patches to different baselines.
I think this is preferrable to missing important bits which might
be lost and/or in uncertain copyright status if not submitted now.
I am willing to answer questions on these patches, but won't have time
for any significant code changes / merges now.  I hope to integrate
some or most of these patches into the FSF mainline when I am at ST
Microelectronics.

Re: SuperH patch contributions

[Andrew Cagney]

I can't speak for GCC.

For GDB, ref:
http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/2003-03/msg00064.html
I'd recommend creating a branch so that you can both post and commit the 
changes.  Good luck!

Andrew

> I am leaving SuperH, and on October the first, I am going to start with
> my new employment at ST Microelectronics.  I expect to continue to work
> on the SH gcc port there.  I have spoken with my manager
> (here at SuperH) what best to do with the current SuperH local patches,
> and we agreed that the best course of action is to post them on the
> gcc-patches / gdb-patches mailing lists.
> Our blanket copyright assignment on file with the FSF assigns copyright
> in changes and/or enhancements to the programs gcc, g++, gdb,
> binutils, libg++, libstdc++, dejagnu, GNU C++ testsuite and GNU C
> testsuite submitted by SuperH, Inc.
> Thus, by submitting these patches, the copyright assignment becomes
> effective for them.
> There will be some overlap between patches to different baselines.
> I think this is preferrable to missing important bits which might
> be lost and/or in uncertain copyright status if not submitted now.
> I am willing to answer questions on these patches, but won't have time
> for any significant code changes / merges now.  I hope to integrate
> some or most of these patches into the FSF mainline when I am at ST
> Microelectronics.

Re: SuperH patch contributions

[Joern Rennecke]

> I'd recommend creating a branch so that you can both post and commit the 
> changes.  Good luck!

I had an accident, an now there is unfortunately not enough time left
to do things nicely.  I want to focus now on getting all the patches
covered, and we can sort out later what part of it can be integrated
and how.

I got a 48 MB gzipped tar file of a sh64 gdb + simulator build.
Uuencoded this is 66 MB.
This is based on a March 2002 snapshot and a number of RedHat patches.
I did mostly patches to the simulator to make it simulate the right thing.
Some of the configury bits (which I didn't wrote) didn't work quite right
(or maybe I was missing some undocumented incantation), so I had to
patch some of the post-configuration files; this is why I included all
the build files in the tarball and it is so large.
It is too large for tha mailing list - or should I split it up into twenty
messages?  What is the preferred way to submit things that large?
Note, there is no time left to identify the post-configuration mods or
do patch review before I leave SuperH.  The objective now is to make these
tools available, and to get the copyright assignment to cover them (which
depends on submitting the code).

Re: SuperH patch contributions

[Daniel Jacobowitz]

On Tue, Sep 21, 2004 at 11:30:08AM +0100, Joern Rennecke wrote:
> > I'd recommend creating a branch so that you can both post and commit the 
> > changes.  Good luck!
> 
> I had an accident, an now there is unfortunately not enough time left
> to do things nicely.  I want to focus now on getting all the patches
> covered, and we can sort out later what part of it can be integrated
> and how.
> 
> I got a 48 MB gzipped tar file of a sh64 gdb + simulator build.
> Uuencoded this is 66 MB.
> This is based on a March 2002 snapshot and a number of RedHat patches.
> I did mostly patches to the simulator to make it simulate the right thing.
> Some of the configury bits (which I didn't wrote) didn't work quite right
> (or maybe I was missing some undocumented incantation), so I had to
> patch some of the post-configuration files; this is why I included all
> the build files in the tarball and it is so large.
> It is too large for tha mailing list - or should I split it up into twenty
> messages?  What is the preferred way to submit things that large?
> Note, there is no time left to identify the post-configuration mods or
> do patch review before I leave SuperH.  The objective now is to make these
> tools available, and to get the copyright assignment to cover them (which
> depends on submitting the code).

Please don't send it to the mailing list.  I believe the last time we
needed to do this we made some space on sources.redhat.com for it, but
I don't know where...

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz

Re: SuperH patch contributions

[Andrew Cagney]

> Please don't send it to the mailing list.  I believe the last time we
> needed to do this we made some space on sources.redhat.com for it, but
> I don't know where...

I'm a step a head of you here, the snapshot has been uploaded to 
ftp://sources.redhat.com/pub/gdb/contrib/superh/

Andrew