A new GCC runtime library license snag?

My understanding is that egcs forked because it was impossible to get changes into the FSF tree. Despite ESR's analogy of free software with "the bazaar", the FSF has always had a "cathedral" mode of development. The egcs people did desire eventual re-merging and were careful to assign copyrights to the FSF. Eventually when the FSF realised gcc 2.8 was a dead-end and egcs had leapfrogged it, they agreed to re-merge with egcs and call the result gcc 2.95. But this happened after most serious users had switched to egcs anyway: gcc 2.7.x was showing its age and gcc 2.8 was seriously flaky. So it was bowing to the inevitable, but it wasn't so bad for the FSF, since it was still GNU software with copyrights held by them. The current situation could turn out worse.