More code code dropping

[Andrew Cagney]

 > 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