That's kind of the thing about Nimrod: It IS easier to learn than the sed, awk and all the other tools bash scripts need to work. Not to mention the bash syntax itself. That means MORE people can learn and use Nimrod if it's made accessible to them. This is no different than using Vala/Genie tools like Midori or should we change it to a bash driven web browser instead? Why not just compile the basics of busybox and then write bash scripts to provide the other coreutils? Slow and complicated? Exactly my point. Simplicity, elegance and speed should be our goal. Not stubbornly sticking to some 'standard' we implemented just because there wasn't a better option. We have a choice now with Vala/Genie, Bacon and Nimrod - Puppy realized that and so does TinyCore. How long will it take us to wake up and see the writing on the wall?
Sponsorship isn't enough. I know I probably shouldn't say this, but we need backing like Debian, Ubuntu, Red Hat, PCLinuxOS and Mandrivia. They all have financial backing from a company or group of companies that pay dedicated staff to work on their distribution. This is why I want to look into creating my own fork of SliTaz with backward compatibility to the repository. I want to squeeze as much as humanly possible into SliTaz that could make it useful to a company and general desktop users. I want to use musl libc to save more space so I can add more with less space needed. I want all the Xorg drivers, office tools, media player, flash plugin and wireless drivers in one place. Kind of like Linux Mint for SliTaz. Anyway, that's my opinion on some of the thing pankso brought up. -- SliTaz GNU/Linux Mailing list - http://www.slitaz.org/
