> When something shows up that doesn't compile, we'll either install
> the needed header file, or change the program if it is misdesigned.

Who is this "we" that is supposed to somehow magically hear about it
when Joe Codeauthor happens to use something in a way not heretofore
anticipated and thereby needs another include file?  And how will this
communication be accomplished?  (Don't forget to include a description
of how Joe is supposed to find out about his end of it, if any.)

Or to put it in a less confrontational but wordier way....

This still feels to me like the sort of patronizing elitism I sketched
in my previous message on this thread, which I might summarize as
"don't worry your pretty little head about the internals, we'll tell
you everything you need to know".

Now, I don't really think anyone actually espouses such views.  But I
sure know that that's how I as a software author would perceive such a
policy, and in this matter I suspect that perception is at least as
important as, if not more important than, reality.

I feel this would crippling NetBSD as a research OS.  Or has NetBSD
decided it's no longer going to try to support such things, presumably
except within its own little developer fraternity?  I sure hope not.
(Though it's already taken some steps in that direction, so maybe so.)

					der Mouse

			       mouse@rodents.montreal.qc.ca
		     7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B