>> OK, I know. I use GNU software. I use Arch, so I’m kinda forced to use it. That’s part of what makes me angry, though. Why are we vendor locked into GNU? Why

>> OK, I know. I use GNU software. I use Arch, so I’m kinda forced to use it. That’s part of what makes me angry, though. Why are we vendor locked into GNU? Why are we still pretending that’s good or not as evil as the vendor lock-in measures taken by Google, MS, or Apple? Landmining your userland and C Standard Library with extensions is exactly what MS does. When MS does it is bad, so why is it acceptable or tolerated when GNU does it? The difference is the license, stupid. You have the source code. It's portable. You can compile/change/run these tools anywhere. It's not vendor lock-in when it's GPL licensed. If you become locked-in because you've really embraced a GNU extension of a "standard" tool, that's probably OK since you can use that same version of tool anywhere. The GNU tools are effectively standard. But hey, just keep railing against them because you don't like RMS or the GPL or whatever axe it is you have to grind. They really are just tools.