http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60793
Manuel López-Ibáñez <manu at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |manu at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #7 from Manuel López-Ibáñez <manu at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to John Marino from comment #6) > I've had copyright assignment for years but haven't submitted anything > substantial because of my limited time and worry that I'll have to chase the > patches and hound and beg and then do some kind of full bootstrap testing > that I'm not prepared to do. The perceived barrier is very high. That's my > problem, but that's why I have hoarded these patches for over two years > (cutting off my nose because I have to keep regenerating them for each > release) But this is something that everybody has to do! It is a trade-off, does it take more effort to keep the patches up-to-date or to get them approved? You should expect reviewers to ask for changes. That is the whole point of having a review process. And for sure you will need to ping the patches several times, there are very few reviewers and they are doing also 99% of the work, so they miss patches all the time. Also, I think you will need to do a full bootstrap+testsuite, why wouldn't you be able to do that? If you don't have a machine powerful enough, you may contact the compile farm to install Dragonfly on a virtual machine: http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/CompileFarm It is also essential that you submit your port in a way that makes it easy for reviewers to know what they are supposed to look at. See a good example: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-07/msg00278.html > Is there a testing farm and could dragonfly x86-64 be added to it? Frankly > I don't care about the i386 platform which will go away at some point, the > sooner the better. In not, you would expect a weekly cron to attempt to > build gcc and mail the results in automatically? That could be done > probably. http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/CompileFarm I am not sure what are the requirements for a tertiary platform, but surely they are very loose once accepted: The port has to be basically unmaintained to get removed.