Re: Can we have the intl directory back?

[Paul Schlie <schlie at comcast dot net>]

>From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
>> On Sat, Nov 20, 2004 at 06:07:56PM -0500, Paul Schlie wrote:
>> I have to confess being thoroughly confused about what is meant by:
>> 
>>  GNU vs. NON-GNU systems; and in what way it's relevant?
>> 
>> As if the term "GNU system" is being used as a euphemism for Linux,
>> implying that decisions may become increasing biased toward Linux, it
>> would be most unfortunate; as regardless of one's philosophical views,
>> uniform support of GNU tools for all reasonably significant POSIX based
>> platforms and supported targets likely remain fundamentally significant
>> to the GNU project's continued long term success, and should not become
>> confused by any potential desire affect Linux's longer term success at
>> the expense of others (which I trust isn't the intent or case).
> 
> You might want to take a look at the gnu.org web site, which describes
> this (and many other) aspect of the GNU project.  Remeber, GDB is the
> _GNU_ Debugger - part of a larger whole.
> 
> The GNU project's views disagree with you on the above.
> 
> Further discussion on this topic, however, seems to me to be off topic
> for a GDB development list - especially gdb-patches.  Take it to a
> general GNU forum.
> 
> -- 
> Daniel Jacobowitz

(Sorry, the context of the question was related to presumed int/ directory
installation, and it's effect on building GDB on GNU vs. non-GNU systems.)

And yes, there's some interesting dynamics at play, on one hand as the GNU
Hurd basically failed to gain sufficient support to ever be useful, GNU
seemingly politically high-jacked the Linux kernel + etc. (truly the OS,
although some apparently prefer to pretend otherwise) damn near claiming it
as it's own; although historically not developed under the sponsorship of
the FSF GNU project, although it did leverage GNU FSF sponsored tools,
libraries, and utilities developed, maintained on, and typically in support
of other operating systems, just as GNU had leveraged on work of others when
convenient.  But somewhat ironically, now Linux appears to be high-jacking
the historical work of the FSF GNU project as it's own, in many ways in
contradiction to the reasons that many had initially sought to contribute
to the GNU project (to establish and evolve what may have been naively
perceived to be a set of platform independent tools "free" of intellectual
encumbrance).

So with some hindsight, although unfortunate, now may be a good time for
those interested in unencumbered multi-platform tools, libraries, and
utilities; to abandon reliance on the GNU project, and begin maintaining
it's own set of sources which are more specifically maintained to be
multi-platform, although continue to leverage GNU/Linux tool, library, and
utility sources/patches as convenient; which might have some interesting
implications.