Which is their right, of course. But it's a little salty to then turn around and demand that the GNU people then be responsible for supporting them anyway.
How maintained can it be if it's not tracking upstream and providing patches, even just to build it? The very premise of your question disproves this assertion.
Look, there was a time when gcc and binutils were the native toolchain on FreeBSD and you could rely on them working as well as they do anywhere. But they aren't anymore, and all the people with the skills to be maintaining a toolchain are working on other software. Binutils is left to rot, honestly.
This isn't because the FSF used to have a CI system, it's because FreeBSD used to have binutils users, and to first approximation it doesn't any more. You're one of the last.
Overall I like BSD licenced code, and I like the approach to minimise dependency on GPL licenced code, but When you get down into things like binary blobs for WiFi units soldered onto mainboards, and Video drivers, things pretty quickly favour the volume of users behind GPL. I just remind myself that 2D non-accellerated graphics are probably what I need even if better 3D is what I want (the binary blobs thing really annoys me)
A lot of BSD energy goes into making base system work with as little GPL as possible. Is there no non-GPL toolsuite for the embedded systems you're targetting?
I could believe the answer is either, both of (a) no and (b) but I need to keep compatibility with GPL produced .so and related objects.