From owner-freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org Mon Jun 13 16:07:31 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5C1CAF118B for ; Mon, 13 Jun 2016 16:07:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 95FA5221A for ; Mon, 13 Jun 2016 16:07:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id u5DG7UCk023446 for ; Mon, 13 Jun 2016 16:07:31 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 161499] [libstdc++] [patch] Use FreeBSD's atomic.h if no cpu-specific code is available Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 16:07:31 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: gnu X-Bugzilla-Version: 8.2-STABLE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Only Me X-Bugzilla-Who: linimon@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Status: Closed X-Bugzilla-Resolution: Overcome By Events X-Bugzilla-Priority: Normal X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 16:07:31 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D161499 --- Comment #4 from Mark Linimon --- Every once in a while various committers go through to try to clean up the stale PRs. (I have spent time doing that; see below.) It's just necessary work that Someone (TM) needs to do. There are various theories of how to go about this. One that I particularly *dis*like is simply to close ones that are older than N months. My feeling= is that it just frustrates submitters. In addition, some of the open bugs are still valid. Of course we still need to figure out a methodology to flag PRs for applicability and non-staleness. OTOH I myself am not in a position to wor= k on that at this time. The reason I am addressing your reply is that IMVHO it is counter-productiv= e.=20 I have received similar replies when I have attempted to triage old PRs in = the past. It has tended to demotivate me to continue doing that, and working through PRs is frustrating enough as it is. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=