Re: [PATCH] add FreeBSD/IA-64 to gcc 3.0.3

[Franz Sirl <Franz dot Sirl-kernel at lauterbach dot com>]

At 11:47 30.10.2001, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
>On Tue, 30 Oct 2001, David O'Brien wrote:
>
> > *sigh*  Are you going to commit to reviewing my patches for adding
> > FreeBSD IA-64, PowerPC, and sparc64 FreeBSD support to the top of the
> > tree?  I have a large problem getting poeple to review these patches that
> > aren't for their favorate OS.
>
>I'm not qualified to review them, though if they add any Texinfo docs
>(e.g., to the list of systems in doc/install.texi) I may be able to
>comment on those if there's anything wrong with them.
>
>When you've posted a mainline patch, if it doesn't get reviewed in
>reasonable time then add a note about it to the PR as well as sending
>repeated reminders to gcc-patches - so that when PR review for 3.1 is done
>it is clear that the problem is lack of patch review, not lack of the work
>itself having been done.
>
> > > Anything else is just a recipe for regressions.
> >
> > This is new OS support, there is nothing to regress.
>
>If new OS support is added in 3.0.3 but doesn't get into 3.1, that would
>be a regression between 3.0.3 and 3.1.

Hmm, I think we are giving David the feeling we let him run around in 
circles and in the end nothing gets committed. His suggestion to install 
him as the FreeBSD maintainer might be the best we can do. Then he has the 
possibility to commit pure FreeBSD fixes to both mainline and branch 
immediately and has a better position vs. the port maintainers (I'm sure 
David remembers me ;-) ). And, if he really breaks something for FreeBSD, 
he's the one users can barf at :-).

I guess this is a issue for the SC? Is a statement from the FreeBSD team 
necessary?

Franz.