Re: [avr-gcc-list] Porting Atmel patches

2012-10-17 Thread Georg-Johann Lay
Joerg Wunsch schrieb: The FSF only allows changes of 10 lines or less in a patch, if there is no copyright assignment on file. I thought with the recent changes, adding a new AVR device is merely going to be a one-liner (a change to avr-devices.c)? Yes, one line in GCC (not counting the regen

Re: [avr-gcc-list] Porting Atmel patches

2012-10-17 Thread Weddington, Eric
> -Original Message- > From: avr-gcc-list-bounces+eric.weddington=atmel@nongnu.org > [mailto:avr-gcc-list-bounces+eric.weddington=atmel@nongnu.org] On > Behalf Of Joerg Wunsch > Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 12:02 PM > To: avr-gcc-list@nongnu.org > Subje

Re: [avr-gcc-list] Porting Atmel patches

2012-10-17 Thread Joerg Wunsch
"Weddington, Eric" wrote: > Gah, that last sentence should read: So, *those* files would have to > be submitted to avr-libc *by Atmel*. If they've already got a BSD-style copyright when they are shipping as part of the Atmel toolchain (I didn't look whether they do), this copyright statement its

Re: [avr-gcc-list] Porting Atmel patches

2012-10-17 Thread Joerg Wunsch
"Weddington, Eric" wrote: > Sure, it's now easier to add devices. But device support also needs > the I/O header file in avr-libc, and no one else can submit that > except Atmel. I think anyone can submit it ;) (because it could be created even based on the datasheet), but that doesn't matter mu

Re: [avr-gcc-list] Porting Atmel patches

2012-10-17 Thread Weddington, Eric
r-gcc-list@nongnu.org; Praveen, Vidya; Wunsch, Joerg; Joerg Wunsch > Subject: Re: [avr-gcc-list] Porting Atmel patches > > > > > Weddington, Eric schrieb: > > >> Behalf Of Joerg Wunsch > > >> > > >>> The FSF only allows changes of 10 lines or

Re: [avr-gcc-list] Porting Atmel patches

2012-10-17 Thread Weddington, Eric
> -Original Message- > From: Georg-Johann Lay [mailto:a...@gjlay.de] > Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 10:39 AM > To: Weddington, Eric > Cc: Joerg Wunsch; avr-gcc-list@nongnu.org; Praveen, Vidya; Wunsch, Joerg > Subject: Re: [avr-gcc-list] Porting Atmel patches >

Re: [avr-gcc-list] Porting Atmel patches

2012-10-17 Thread Georg-Johann Lay
Weddington, Eric schrieb: Behalf Of Joerg Wunsch The FSF only allows changes of 10 lines or less in a patch, if there is no copyright assignment on file. I thought with the recent changes, adding a new AVR device is merely going to be a one-liner (a change to avr-devices.c)? Sure, it's now e

Re: [avr-gcc-list] Porting Atmel patches

2012-10-17 Thread Weddington, Eric
> -Original Message- > From: David Brown [mailto:da...@westcontrol.com] > Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2012 7:35 AM > To: Weddington, Eric > Cc: Joerg Wunsch; avr-gcc-list@nongnu.org > Subject: Re: Porting Atmel patches > > > Isn't it possible for a potential contributor to "give" the patch

Re: [avr-gcc-list] Porting Atmel patches

2012-10-17 Thread Weddington, Eric
> -Original Message- > From: avr-gcc-list-bounces+eric.weddington=atmel@nongnu.org > [mailto:avr-gcc-list-bounces+eric.weddington=atmel@nongnu.org] On > Behalf Of Joerg Wunsch > Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2012 7:58 AM > To: avr-gcc-list@nongnu.org > Subje

Re: [avr-gcc-list] Porting Atmel patches

2012-10-16 Thread Joerg Wunsch
>The FSF only allows changes of 10 lines or less in a patch, if there >is no copyright assignment on file. I thought with the recent changes, adding a new AVR device is merely going to be a one-liner (a change to avr-devices.c)? -- cheers, J"org .-.-. --... ...-- -.. . DL8DTL

Re: [avr-gcc-list] Porting Atmel patches

2012-10-16 Thread David Brown
@nongnu.org Subject: Re: [avr-gcc-list] Porting Atmel patches Georg-Johann Lay wrote: Notice you must have passed the paperwork. Well, don't you think that adding support for a new AVR device would consist a simple change that doesn't require the full paperwork? I think it's always a

Re: [avr-gcc-list] Porting Atmel patches

2012-10-16 Thread Weddington, Eric
> -Original Message- > From: avr-gcc-list-bounces+eric.weddington=atmel@nongnu.org > [mailto:avr-gcc-list-bounces+eric.weddington=atmel@nongnu.org] On > Behalf Of Joerg Wunsch > Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2012 12:17 AM > To: avr-gcc-list@nongnu.org > Subje

Re: [avr-gcc-list] Porting Atmel patches

2012-10-16 Thread Praveen, Vidya
@nongnu.org] on behalf of Joerg Wunsch [j...@uriah.heep.sax.de] Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2012 11:47 AM To: avr-gcc-list@nongnu.org Subject: Re: [avr-gcc-list] Porting Atmel patches Georg-Johann Lay wrote: > Notice you must have passed the paperwork. Well, don't you think tha

Re: [avr-gcc-list] Porting Atmel patches

2012-10-15 Thread Joerg Wunsch
Georg-Johann Lay wrote: > Notice you must have passed the paperwork. Well, don't you think that adding support for a new AVR device would consist a simple change that doesn't require the full paperwork? I think it's always a good idea for a potential contributor to file the paperwork, but for a

Re: [avr-gcc-list] Porting Atmel patches

2012-10-15 Thread Georg-Johann Lay
Adam Seychell wrote: > Hi > > I have joined this list to get help with port 8bit AVR patches > disributed with Atmel's AVR toolchain to the current official GCC, and > binutils. As you may be aware, Atmel have separated development from the > official gcc, binutils and avr-libc projects. I am new

Re: [avr-gcc-list] Porting Atmel patches

2012-10-14 Thread Weddington, Eric
> -Original Message- > From: avr-gcc-list-bounces+eric.weddington=atmel@nongnu.org > [mailto:avr-gcc-list-bounces+eric.weddington=atmel@nongnu.org] On > Behalf Of Adam Seychell > Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2012 10:18 PM > To: avr-gcc-list@nongnu.org > Subject: [avr-gcc-list] Porting