Re: Fix stack backtraces on 26-bit ARM

[Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at cygnus dot com>]

> On Sat, 20 Oct 2001, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> 
> 
>> Hmm, this could get interesting.  A NetBSD/arm port of GDB would
>> certainly help improve the quality of the Arm GDB target.  Your
>> contribution are going to be most welcome.  Problem is, I can't find a
>> copyright assignment for you (you'll get a separate e-mail about this).
>> Can you please clarify your assignment status?  Not having an
>> assignment can make things, er, interesting.  At present your submitting
>> small simple bugs that can be described in simple english.
> 
> 
> I've signed assignments for GCC and Binutils.  I'm happy to sign one for
> GDB as well.  I haven't worked out quite who wrote our existing ARM GDB
> stuff: it was checked in by Todd Vierling, but I think the work was mostly
> done by Mark Brinicombe.

Yes, please get an assignment.  It makes everyones life soooo much easier.

If you're not sure where the code came from and/or it isn't clear that 
the original contributors have an assignment then you'll need to 
``ignore'' it.  Most recent *BSD contributors have ended up abandoning 
their old branch, instead starting anew.

Having said that, the approach you appear to be taking looks to be the 
right one - identify individual bugs and get them submitted/fixed.

>> The other thing to know is that patches should be against the current
>> trunk rather than the last release.  5.0 is just so old ...
> 
> 
> Unfortunately, 5.0 is what NetBSD is currently working towards using, so
> all my patches are likely to start life there.  I'll do what I can to
> ensure they're still relevant to the trunk, though.

Hmm, something additional to note, GDB 5.1-branch and current both work 
on many more NetBSD systems than 5.0.  You man want to consider getting 
current working first.

good luck!
Andrew