Grsecurity stable patches to be limited to sponsors

Clang is already technically superior than GCC for many purposes -- Most prominently being its considerable advantage over GCC in C++ compile times (for roughly equivalent code size and performance). LLVM/Clang is also a much nicer codebase to work with, with a more modular internal structure, and is much easier to embed. This opens up entire classes of uses that are nearly impossible to do with GCC -- the fact that pretty much every graphics stack (F/OSS or otherwise) now uses LLVM to compile shaders and whatnot is a testament to that.

I know there are several efforts in play to utilize Clang by the major distributions, but that effort is focused more on uncovering subtle bugs that just happen to be hidden by what basically amounts to a compiler monoculture, and to a lesser extent finding ways in which Clang can be improved. There is no real desire to get rid of/replace GCC outright (outside of the big commercial concerns that are pumping so much money into LLVM, that is. You really must ask yourself why they're doing this, and what it means for you as a developer and/or an end-user..).

While I'm personally glad LLVM/Clang exists and has matured so rapidly, I'm disappointed that so much of the "enthusiasm" surrounding it is solely due to its licensing allowing proprietization and rabid hatred of anything to do with the FSF and its GPL. In doing so, they are enthusiastically acting against their own long-term interests, and proud of it.