Clemens Koller wrote: The CRUX philosophy (stay simple and functional) is the key to be portable to other architectures. --- Giorgio Lando wrote: CRUX sometimes seems dead, just because it is following linux development without adding any complexity and obstrusity. This is why footprint mismatches should be analyzed directly by the users (something new is entering their system, they have to decide what to do) and why use flags are a way to obfuscate the way a package is built (a user should directly verify how a specific package is compiled editing the Pkgfile). --- Johannes Winkelmann wrote: if you fork: <snip> you can decide freely on the features of your distro, <snip> I can keep using CRUX. --- And that is relevant even for those of us who don't want to make a new distro, but just want to do a few things differently; CRUX makes that easy and possible. For me it is in some ways the biggest attraction of CRUX. The other BIG attraction is that the mechanisms of the distro are not intruding into the applications software, so that it can be very up-to-date - no waiting for the distro to fiddle with it, and no or minimal interference by the distro in its functions. A point I often forget to mention is that I am not forced into a "desktop", I can function without ever needing to click on an Icon; yet I have as many graphical applications as I want.. clare (Happy CRUX user from version 0.9)