Re: 1 year src-patch anniversary!

From: Fabian Keil <freebsd-listen_at_fabiankeil.de>
Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2023 14:25:10 UTC
Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com> wrote on 2023-01-29 at 23:29:48:

> On 1/29/23, Jamie Landeg-Jones <jamie@catflap.org> wrote:
> > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=261657 is a trivial fix
> > to an admittedly trivial issue, but it's soon going to hit one year old,
> > and has not had any feedback. Not even "this is rubbish. close ticket"
> >
> > | jamie@catwalk:~ % stat 'so good they named it twice'
> > | stat: so good they named it twice: stat: No such file or directory
> >
> > As such, it's the oldest of my patches to be completely ignored, but then,
> > most of my fixes I haven't even submitted, because, what's the point?
> > I've instead spent time writing something so the patches are automatically
> > aplied to my src tree, and distributed to all my servers.
> >
> > I know it's a volunteer effort, but I've been here 25 years, and whilst
> > I could (and should) take on more port-maintainership, any other offers
> > of help have fallen on deaf ears.
> >
> 
> Well I was not aware of it.
> 
> mail me with git format-patch result and I'll commit.

Is this an open invitation?

I can easily beat the 1 year anniversary with a couple of
ggate-related patches:
<https://www.fabiankeil.de/sourcecode/electrobsd/ElectroBSD-13-f5631983b23-2023.02.02-ggate.diff>

Teaser:
fk@t520 /usr/src $grep "^Reported" ~/web/www.fabiankeil.de/sourcecode/electrobsd/ElectroBSD-13-f5631983b23-2023.02.02-ggate.diff 
Reported to security-officer@FreeBSD.org on 2014-12-09.
Reported to security-officer@FreeBSD.org on 2014-12-09.
Reported to security-officer@FreeBSD.org on 2014-12-09.
Reported to security-officer@FreeBSD.org on 2014-12-09.
Reported to security-officer@FreeBSD.org on 2014-12-09.
Reported to security-officer@FreeBSD.org on 2015-04-05.
Reported to security-officer@FreeBSD.org on 2015-04-05.
Reported to security-officer@FreeBSD.org on 2015-04-05.

The patch set is against stable/13 but I could rebase
on HEAD if there's interest and actual merge conflicts.

Fabian