Patches Proposed So Microsoft Debuggers Can Deal With GCC-Built MinGW Executables

[fkelava]

What matters is the driving intent and the overall direction of the agenda. Even if M$ engages in truly non-harmful discrete contributions, if that is only in the name of gaining trust and traction to conduct harmful actions, it is still ultimately a bad thing.

Call me suspicious, but I strongly doubt M$ is driven by an interest, different from continuing its malignant growth and expanding its ability to extract profit from controlling and selectively stifling progress.

Need I remind you that the company achieved quite the monopoly on actions most people wouldn't identify as harmful, and even identify as beneficial to them?

So maybe the problem is not in the count of glances you make, but that it takes more of an in-depth examination than a superficial momentary glance.

Fair. I understand your reasoning and I can see the point, especially given MS' historical tendencies. I don't blame you for being suspicious nor will I advise against it.

I'll openly admit that I wasn't around in the heyday of MS' expansionism. I clearly don't have the same (or full, for that matter) understanding of the situation- and I feel that it'd be inappropriate for me to consequently argue about their interests at large. Thank you for taking the time to respond.

I hope it is clear that I have no malicious intent with my points.

[coder]

Glad to hear it, but it sadly comes about 15 years too late for me.

[coder]

Embrace - done
Extend - done
Extinguish - ongoing

Also, how do you skip so many glances, and what could you be missing along?

I agree with extreme skepticism of Microsoft, but how do you see this specific move being used to extinguish anything? Do you think they're really ever going to break GDB-support or disadvantage ELF-debugging? I just don't see that happening.

Also, I know how annoying it is to try to debug issues in projects using a mix of different object formats, on Windows, and I can see this having a positive impact on MinGW users and users of libraries built with it. It really strikes me more as a pragmatic contribution, rather than part of a nefarious scheme.

[coder]

What matters is the driving intent and the overall direction of the agenda. Even if M$ engages in truly non-harmful discrete contributions, if that is only in the name of gaining trust and traction to conduct harmful actions, it is still ultimately a bad thing.

That verges on paranoia. The open source community needs to be wary of all commercial players' interests, but I think MS is no more special than Google, for instance.

It seems to me that Embrace/Extend/Extinguish is a strategy that only works well from a position of dominance. And MS lost the war over platform dominance, so now they have to play along. The war they're currently waging is further up the stack, in the arena of cloud services and data.

[ddriver]

It seems to me that Embrace/Extend/Extinguish is a strategy that only works well from a position of dominance. And MS lost the war over platform dominance, so now they have to play along. The war they're currently waging is further up the stack, in the arena of cloud services and data.

It doesn't need dominance, it needs a position of sufficient power and influence, and in this aspect, M$ is stronger than it has ever been.

And it hasn't really lost any dominance, it is still as dominant as ever in the areas where it was dominant in the past. Do not get confused over their failed efforts to enter new markets, they are still very much dominant, and the market share of linux workstations, desktops and laptops is still negligible. M$ is striving for influence over linux, and they will use that influence to... well... to influence linux in accordance to its interests, which haven't really changed.

It is actually kinda funny, because linux was created to oppose M$'s domination, yet it didn't really do anything in this regard, and ironically, today M$ gets more out of linux than linux does for independent linux users.

A good example of how seamlessly harmless, even seemingly contributing actions can end up harmful for users is nvidia's game developer assistance efforts. They'd do most of the work, required to optimize a game engine for the actual developers, which sets this as sort of a norm, and promotes laziness. The result is, since amd wasn't in the position to be able to to afford to do the same, a tremendous amount of games ended up absent any optimizations for radeon gpus, which in turn made radeon gpus seem weaker, allowing nvidia to gain market share, depriving rtg from revenue and r&d budget, stifling competition.

I've heard myths about how much better M$ debugging tools are, but I haven't really seen that manifest in practice. I've done plenty of debugging with their dev tools, because that's what the my job at the time mandated for that exact reason of "being better", but I didn't really see any of that relative to my experience with gdb. In fact, the dominant factor, determining my debugging experience and performance was the quality of the code and the nature of the issue. If anything, M$ tools are far more bloated, with results in a worse user experience. Today I wouldn't even consider installing M$ dev tools on any of my personal systems, which are orders of magnitude more bloated, without really offering any advantages.

The deprivation of choice usually works in the following manner - at first it is optional, then it becomes recommended, and before you know it, it is mandatory. And linux is a bit too open for its own good, and in my experience, there is no such thing as a healthy extremity. Balance is by far more important, and it doesn't exactly take a genius strategist to see how being open to adversaries might not be all that virtuous.

Finally, let me put it this way:

If there is say a multiple convinced pedophile, who has served his sentences, and subsequently released back into society, would you have a problem with that person "altruistically" giving candy to your child? Surely, there is nothing wrong with giving kids what they like? Right?

I wouldn't call it paranoia, but realism, rationality, reason and common sense.

[BesiegedAce]

Somehow I just knew I'd see EEE's beaten (like a horse) corpse raised in this thread. Never change Phoronix Forums, never change.

[NateHubbard]

I don't trust Microsoft either. Not one bit.
However, this seems about as dangerous to open source as a library to read docx files.

[coder]

Somehow I just knew I'd see EEE's beaten (like a horse) corpse raised in this thread. Never change Phoronix Forums, never change.

The community's skepticism isn't unwarranted. I would find it more unsettling if Microsoft's contributions and engagement were embraced unquestioningly.

That said, skepticism itself should be examined, critically. Basically, I think these are healthy discussions.

[microcode]

Cool, each component gives an option to go one step further. Some day most NT drivers will be Linux driver ports and MS will just give up lol.

[sandain]

<snip>CRAZY Conspiracy CRAP</snip>

Finally, let me put it this way:

If there is say a multiple convinced pedophile, who has served his sentences, and subsequently released back into society, would you have a problem with that person "altruistically" giving candy to your child? Surely, there is nothing wrong with giving kids what they like? Right?

I wouldn't call it paranoia, but realism, rationality, reason and common sense.

Ohh, but won't you think of the children? Did you forget to take your meds this morning Donny?