-------- Original Message --------

> On Sat, 29 Nov 2025 19:41:23 -0500
> Steve Litt <slitt@???> wrote:
>
>> Didier Kryn said on Sat, 29 Nov 2025 10:11:11 +0100
>>
>>> Let me suggest to
>>> build a static Busybox and install it on /bin and /sbin; it'll take
>>> you less effort, and the concept has fun by itself, which Slackware
>>> hasn't.
>>

So GNU takes BSD utilities and adds a new incompatible license and adds new
functionality that can't be added directly to the original components whose
design they copied. They don't keep the original code because they're riding on
the AT&T case saying use this and you won't have to worry. Then busybox comes
along with less and different? functionality than even the original BSD utilities.

Then GNU discourages using the 0BSD license based on nonsense hearsay

https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html

"However, to help make sure this language cannot cause any trouble in the
future, we encourage developers to choose a different license for their own works. "

And no it isn't the OpenBSD license as they kept the original "and" wording
after deciding it was nonsense.

So now we have multiple disorganised variants (/sbin /bin and /usr/bin /usr/sbin
seen as compatible) and does busybox even ship man pages because I seem to
remember livecds with busybox not having flags I normally used nor man pages to
help me? Kind of like the annoying but useful sysresccd

The fun in Slackware would be in seeing if there is a middle ground but probably
not (just based on hearing it's the most BSD like).