[kernel] enable crash on other architectures

[Josh Boyer]

On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 7:13 PM, Kyle McMartin <kmcmarti at redhat.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 07:06:48PM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> > So that the userland package we build there is useful?
>>
>> OK.  Did it get tested?
>>
>
> No, it's not a code change on any supported architecture beyond ARM.
>
>> > If you want to drop it, drop it then.
>> >
>> >> Also, please post for review first.
>> >>
>> >
>> > As soon as you guys start? Given I was explicitly given commit access,
>> > and I'm not just running rampant with global commit permission or
>> > something, I am just fixing what I see needing to be fixed.
>>
>> We have started.  Any patch that doesn't have a bug attached to it and
>> isn't a rebase or config change has been posted here first for the
>> past few cases.  If I've missed some, I'm as guilty as the next guy.
>> It's not about running rampant with commit permission.  It's about
>> knowing where stuff is coming from and why.
>>
>
> Fine, whatever, given this is a requirement no other package seems to
> have, I'm disinclined to contribute further. Congrats. Also, I think

That's a fair point.  Would you suggest we stick with a model that
stuff gets put in and we figure out why later if it breaks or why we
added it?  I'm not asking that sarcastically.  My goal is to improve
things, not make them worse for arbitrary reasons.

> documenting fixes to your patches beyond the %changelog is a waste of my

%changelog is pretty limited.  Works great for bug numbers, kinda crap
for everything else.

> time given the general quality of the out of tree crap you've stuffed in
> there already.

If you could be specific it would be helpful.  If there's quality
issues we can address them.  That's kind of the point of doing asking
people to post first.  If it accomplishes nothing more than we fix our
past mistakes, we're still better off.

josh