Re: which patches to review

["David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com>]

   From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com>
   Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 13:15:57 -0400

   Here, you're mistaken.
   
He isn't %100 wrong.  I've been asked repeatedly to basically
multi-arch the Sparc targets out the wazoo to get the Linux
Sparc bits in.

While I have no problem doing the multi-arch work (I actually think
it's a barrel of laughs to kill some of these ancient bogon macros
:-)), I would have much rathered merged my Sparc Linux support in THEN
multi-arch'd everything.

I've even stated this desire of mine multiple times during the
patch submission process.  Every time I got back a "well.. you should
really multi arch this first, and then multi arch that".

Right now all of the Sparc Linux bits are in a pending state because
they need to be sequenced after the multi-arch bits.  Currently, this
one is holding up sparc-linux-tdep from being added:

	http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2002-04/msg00710.html

The Sparc Linux native bits are:

	http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2002-04/msg00644.html
	http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2002-04/msg00670.html

What remains after that are my bug fixes and all of those are in one
of three states:

1) Waiting on discussion on some issues.
2) Whatever issues are resolved, I have to rewrite the patch
3) Waiting for reports on whether Solaris regressions are
   introduced by the change

Do you see what I mean?  I could have Linux Sparc in there fully now,
but instead I'm in multi arch land.