From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29258 invoked by alias); 26 Apr 2002 03:27:25 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 29248 invoked from network); 26 Apr 2002 03:27:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (24.112.240.27) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 26 Apr 2002 03:27:22 -0000 Received: from cygnus.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C0973D58; Thu, 25 Apr 2002 23:27:22 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3CC8C919.6070009@cygnus.com> Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 20:27:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:0.9.9) Gecko/20020424 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "David S. Miller" Cc: shebs@apple.com, drow@mvista.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: which patches to review References: <3CC6E84D.2090403@cygnus.com> <20020424.103856.00478620.davem@redhat.com> <3CC8137D.6050809@cygnus.com> <20020425.175459.00457839.davem@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-04/txt/msg01067.txt.bz2 > I think that is an unreasonable requirement and it will serve often to > deter new contributors. Because they will come here trying to > contribute support for a new platform, and they will do so on the > evaluation that they have the time to merge just that addition. > This means they think they have time to submit the addition and tweak > a thing or two to make the patch acceptable. > > Unlike me, they won't have weeks upon weeks of spare time available to > multiarch the cpu target in question. > > I believe this was a bad decision and it is not the only way the GDB > team could have obtained their goal of getting things multi-arched. ``weeks upon weeks of spare time''! Yes, love it! Andrew