Who controls glibc?
lwn.net
Who controls glibc?
1–10 of 528 posts
Re: Who controls glibc?
#2What an unexpected schism!
> "As the head of the GNU Project, I am in charge of what we publish in GNU manuals. I decide the criteria to decide by, too"
Interesting. Sounds decidedly authoritarian to cite (sole?) control of the content and criteria.
> "I exercise my authority over Glibc very rarely -- and when I have done so, I have talked with the official maintainers. So rarely that some of you thought that you are entirely autonomous."
That sounds puzzling. "It turns out my rank actually supersedes yours and always has, I've just never exercised it until now."
In general I've always thought that Stallman is to be admired. He's made a fantastic contribution to society. I don't really have a position on the issue at the heart of this manpage content debate, but on the meta-issue of what his role is/should be, his position seems like an odd one.
Ultimately, the copyright holders for the source code (and to some extent the manuals) have the real power regarding "who controls glibc?". I suspect that no one will care strongly enough about this particular issue in order to drive a real fork.
Re: Who controls glibc?
#3I am one of those people who subscribe to some of Stallman's crazier ideas, and one of those people who thinks trigger warnings are often misused[1].
That being said, I am really for professionalism in code and documentation. This might have been a fun joke for a pet project at one point in time, but I totally agree it should be removed.
I really feel like Stallman is lacking some serious maturity here as well. It nothing to even do with being offended about the joke, it's just a basic idea of professionalism around documentation.
It'd be different if the joke was in a comment, or even in a tutorial on how to use a library (if it wasn't an official tutorial or was intended to have a humorous tone).
To be clear, I don't even like the stupid "Apt has super cow powers" at the bottom of apt-get. If you want to make jokes, put them in your blog, or your YouTube screencast, or at most in the comments.
[1]: Trigger warnings came from the idea of post traumatic stress. But you don't know what can trigger memories of trauma. A rainbow could invoke a PTSD episode for someone who associates that with a loved one that was killed. I think a better approach is the old TV saying, "Viewer/Listener discretion is advised" if something might be offensive.
Re: Who controls glibc?
#4RMS has been arguing for technical freedom for decades. Ironically, all the technical freedom in the world won't save us from political correctness.
Re: Who controls glibc?
#5What an unexpected schism! > "As the head of the GNU Project, I am in charge of what we publish in GNU manuals. I decide the criteria to decide by, too" Interesting. Sounds decidedly authoritarian to cite (sole?) control of the content and criteria. > "I exercise my authority over Glibc very rarely -- and when I have done so, I have talked with the official maintainers. So rarely that some of you thought that you are…
I know of one distro that uses muslc [0] vs. glibc and they have a wrapper that allows most build tools to work (mostly) as expected. Are there any other options?
Re: Who controls glibc?
#6What an unexpected schism! > "As the head of the GNU Project, I am in charge of what we publish in GNU manuals. I decide the criteria to decide by, too" Interesting. Sounds decidedly authoritarian to cite (sole?) control of the content and criteria. > "I exercise my authority over Glibc very rarely -- and when I have done so, I have talked with the official maintainers. So rarely that some of you thought that you are…
I know of one distro that uses muslc [0] vs. glibc and they have a wrapper that allows most build tools to work (mostly) as expected. Are there any other options? [0] - https://www.musl-libc.org/faq.html
For open source libc? musl, glibc, dietlibc, bionic are the only I know of. The supported targets vary widely among these, though.
Re: Who controls glibc?
#7Email thread: https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2018-05/msg00001.html
That gets a bit whacky when RMS asserts control over glibc as the GNU project maintainer and asks them to add it back:
Re: Who controls glibc?
#8Email thread: https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2018-05/msg00001.html That gets a bit whacky when RMS asserts control over glibc as the GNU project maintainer and asks them to add it back: https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2018-05/msg00149.html
The email thread is far more interesting/informative. I would argue it would be a better link for the main headline.
Re: Who controls glibc?
#9Email thread: https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2018-05/msg00001.html That gets a bit whacky when RMS asserts control over glibc as the GNU project maintainer and asks them to add it back: https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2018-05/msg00149.html
The email thread is far more interesting/informative. I would argue it would be a better link for the main headline.
HN won't let me edit the URL. I guess only a mod can do that.
@dang, can you do the honors sir^
Re: Who controls glibc?
#10I don't get it