I don't see any reason not to do this. @emaste: do you want to commit this, or shall I?

This version looks good to me.

I think the warning about x86 could be stronger than this. Would "keeping on life support" be more accurate than a "commitment to maintaining support"?

Looks good to me. Thank you.

Great work! Thanks very much. This should help me not get behind on FreeBSD SAs going forward.

This is great! Thanks for doing this work. This can save me a lot of time. 😁

I think this is a good compromise. I suggest some minor grammar/wording changes to clarify the comment. Nothing consequential. This looks good to me.

If neither allow_severity or deny_severity are referenced anywhere else, this looks good to me.
I have only reviewed the patch. I haven't actually tested it.

This looks good to me.

Thank you very much!

This branch passes my build tests and my functional tests.
Please let it sit in main for a couple of days before merging to stable.

I think this looks good now. Thanks you!

Thanks for doing this! My builds are still running. I'll take a closer look at this patch my morning.

This looks good. Thanks for submitting this upstream too. I saw your post on tz@.

I like this idea, but I don't think this should live under /usr/share/zoneinfo. I believe that zoneinfo should *only* contain files generated by tzdata.

I think this is good to go. Thank you!

This change looks good in principle, but please adjust the commentary and constant naming to more closely reflect the standard. This makes the code easier to read and understand.

Thank you!

I don't have these systems to test on. I trust you've tested this patch well. Your patch compiles and, as far as I can tell, doesn't break the system I've cursorily tested (Supermicro).