This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Latest Glibc from CVS has segmentation problems.
Marcus Brinkmann <email@example.com> writes:
> > I would like to see such an effort as well, but that is really beside
> > the point.
> I am not talking about "liking to see such an effort". I am talking
> about if you want things get done, do them. Free Software never meant
> that other people do the work for you, nor does it mean that you can
> state the rules of other people's work.
As I said, it is beside the point. A "glibc for newbies" effort has
nothing to do with what I am talking about.
> Now, inquiries, suggestions, criticism, etc, all that is allowed.
> It's a natural part of the whole. But the only thing that
> guarantees a result is your own work.
Sure. And right now, I am just making suggestions and criticisms.
> For glibc, the status quo is that the maintainers do the developing,
> and that almost all of the end-user business is proxied by the
> distributions. That is the case because it just makes sense. I am
> repeating myself here, but glibc is almost never, ever shipped by
> distributions as released. So, bug reports always should first go to
> the distribution maker, and so on.
Ditto for the Linux kernel. Gee, I wonder why it is so different?
> Yes, this puts people who want to do it differently at an advantage.
> That's a pity, but there is just nobody you can blame. A priori, it
> is a fact you have to accept and live with it.
Not true. If I can convince enough other people, or the right other
people, that this is a problem, then something might be done about it.
GNU libc is an FSF project. Deliberately putting small organizations
and individuals at a disadvantage to large corporations is counter to
their entire philosophy, as I understand it.
Maintaining a GNU package is a job. Part of that job is making
releases. So the current GNU libc maintainer is clearly not doing his
job. Can we all at least agree on that?
> It's that simple. Even so much as documenting the status quo on the
> web pages is work.
It would be minutes of work by one person to save hours of time by
unknown numbers of others. Which may mean nothing in your world view,
but it does in mine.