I was unaware that drepper had left redhat (and glibc).<p>He's now at Goldman Sachs.<p><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/ulrichdrepper" rel="nofollow">https://www.linkedin.com/in/ulrichdrepper</a>
This seems like a very similar situation to egcs and gcc: a fork created because the original project proved too painful to work with, and folded back in after sorting out the project governance issues that caused the fork in the first place.
Odd. I had always been convinced that they switched back to glibc again a while ago, but it seems they're beginning to do it only now.<p>A lot of people are against forks that they deem frivolous or unnecessary, but I think it's one of the most pragmatic and important parts of free software. It's a failsafe, a Second Amendment, if you will.
Wow, Debian (and by extension Ubuntu) has been using eglibc for five years and I haven't noticed?<p>I even compiled new versions of gcc + glibc (and installed them into $HOME, to run new binaries on older installations). You think I should have noticed that there was no glibc on the host system to begin with. But actually, the only thing I noticed is that the glibc (and gcc) build system is a bit crazy, and that it definitely will benefit from a new project lead.