Re: [PATCH 00/10] All of my not-yet-reviewed patches

[Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>]

On Tue, 9 May 2017, Zack Weinberg wrote:

> I think that patches 1 through 7 should be good to go as is, but they
> all do still need careful review, they're all touching old, dusty code
> with API and ABI implications.  Patches 8, 9, and 10 are more
> experimental; patch 8 in particular is a deliberate API (but not ABI,
> I think) break.

As I see it, patches 5, 7, 8, 9 and 10 would need NEWS entries if 
accepted.  Patch 5 is adding a new feature (error_t enumeration being made 
available on non-Hurd), patch 7 is adding a new public header 
sys/uio_ext.h and declaring it to be the main home for certain extensions 
(which is something that really needs considering carefully, apart from 
the more routine cleanups in that patch), while patches 8, 9 and 10 are 
removing public interfaces (you can argue about the extent to which any 
public interface is involved in patches 9 and 10, but I'd say that 
__USE_STRING_INLINES and __NO_STRING_INLINES are currently public 
interfaces, whose effects are being removed).

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com