glibc fork, to some extent

[D. Hugh Redelmeier]

| From: Lennart Sorensen <lsorense-1wCw9BSqJbv44Nm34jS7GywD8/FfD2ys at public.gmane.org>

| On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 03:44:53AM -0400, D. Hugh Redelmeier wrote:

| > This does not seem stable.  No, not UD's prickliness -- that seems stable.  
| > I mean the fork, sort of, status.  It will be interesting to see where it 
| > goes in, say, the next year.
| 
| Well remember egcs?  That eventually became gcc from which it had forked.

Quite.

I meant that the system as a whole (GLIBC + fork, sort of) doesn't
seem stable.  I can see several possible outcomes:

- EGLIBC diverges (after all, tracking is hard work and actually may
  reduce the value of EGLIBC).  Both projects have a large enough
  niche to survive

- EGLIBC or GLIBC ends up being where the action is.  The other
  whithers.

Note that the main GLIBC maintainers are at Redhat.  This detail might
matter in several ways.
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists