I've written some math papers in troff. I spent less time doing math and
more time tinkering with troff, to get things to show up properly. LaTeX looks
prettier still, but handling UTF-8 in the source goes a long way towards
legibility (especially if you have to come back to it after a while).
I a
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 4:06 PM, Steve Simon wrote:
>> It can't be that
>> hard to parse out DIR= from there and turn it into a native mkfile.
>
> Ok, its not that simple but perhaps somthing along the lines of
> /sys/src/cmd/mk/mkconv could help?
Did you try it? Might be worth trying it. We did.
Ok, its not that simple but perhaps somthing along the lines of
/sys/src/cmd/mk/mkconv could help?
/^DIR=,^$/...
> It can't be that
> hard to parse out DIR= from there and turn it into a native mkfile.
Ok, its not that simple but perhaps somthing along the lines of
/sys/src/cmd/mk/mkconv could help?
-Steve
i guess ant is the solution.
http://xkcd.com/927/
http://xkcd.com/912/
On Fri, 02 Dec 2011 14:29:05 PST Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
> make
> nmake
> pmake
> bmake
> mk
> gmake
jam
cmake
scons
> i guess ant is the solution.
http://xkcd.com/927/
On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 02:34:49PM -0800, Christopher Nielsen wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 14:29, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
> > make
> > nmake
> > pmake
> > bmake
> > mk
> > gmake
> >
> > i guess ant is the solution. lord knows posix could not decide on a single
> > syntax. because it would mean
I think I'll reconsider using troff for my thesis, because some math
is sure to come across. But learning more about troff is indeed
useful.
2011/12/2 simon softnet :
> By the way, I am currently forced to use LaTeX.
> It's because formulas look nicer, and also because my current
> supervisor asks
Having had to (grudgingly) deal with ant, I would say that it is
definitely not the solution. Ant uses XML for its syntax. I think that
says it all.
But is the ant not tattooed on the camel's nose?
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 14:29, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
> make
> nmake
> pmake
> bmake
> mk
> gmake
>
> i guess ant is the solution. lord knows posix could not decide on a single
> syntax. because it would mean picking one syntax. which was against the
> rules. unlike all the places where they di
By the way, I am currently forced to use LaTeX.
It's because formulas look nicer, and also because my current
supervisor asks me to.
I was thinking of writing a program that accepts a file formated with
-ms or -me macros and translates it to LaTeX equivalent macros. This
way, I would hopefully hav
make
nmake
pmake
bmake
mk
gmake
i guess ant is the solution. lord knows posix could not decide on a
single syntax. because it would mean picking one syntax. which was
against the rules. unlike all the places where they did that in the C
library. fecking eeegits.
I have written my bachelor's thesis (80 pages with graphs, tables,
diagrams, equations, etc..) in pure troff -me.
It went as smooth as I could ever hope for.
LaTeX is much more difficult to use, IMO.
Simon.
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 10:02 PM, wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 10:45:24AM -0800, John
s/that's just code/"that's just code"/ in my previous email.
> if the rule is literally "zero change", then we should give up now.
Russ has been most accommodating with changes in the Go tree. As far
as go portability to Plan 9 is concerned, that's not a problem (except
the few actual problems that need fixing, but that's just code). The
issue is polluting
Yes, for the R7RS small language. And a very nice one! Alex has been very open
and responsive about integrating plan9 related fixes.
I'd like to see a native code compiling Scheme impl on plan9 as well but that
can wait until we have some useful code that would benefit from any compilation
spee
On Fri Dec 2 13:21:09 EST 2011, rminn...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 9:58 AM, Francisco J Ballesteros wrote:
> > +1 for using parallel mkfiles.
>
> as I say, I liked this too, but it fails the zero changes rule.
if the rule is literally "zero change", then we should give up now.
On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 10:45:24AM -0800, John Floren wrote:
>
> > There was even a bunch of connections last week because somebody was
> > looking for TeX on phones... (I don't know why, but the community marvel
> > named TeXlive didn't seem to be the first choice in this case...)
> >
>
> Ah, I
nobody is stopping you from doing anything. go for it.
ron
My freebsd-current flamewar is dying out, so time for something new ...
Why are parallel mkfiles in the /go tree considered eeevil? They seemed
to be very low overhead. Surely accomodations are being made for Windows.
Regardless, if we want native go, is it that unreasonable to maintain a
p
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 10:29 AM, wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 10:16:26AM -0800, ron minnich wrote:
>>[...]
>> tex/latex, once clean and small, are now a beast,
>
> Uh! There are days when I wonder why I have done kerTeX... (well, I know
> why: because _I_ use it!). Do you know that kerTeX has
On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 10:16:26AM -0800, ron minnich wrote:
>[...]
> tex/latex, once clean and small, are now a beast,
Uh! There are days when I wonder why I have done kerTeX... (well, I know
why: because _I_ use it!). Do you know that kerTeX has everything,
including BibTeX (hell to fix!) and ca
Could be worse, they might require using IE on Windows 7 to submit them.
Or perhaps they already do?
Silverlight runs on Macs, too.
On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 01:13:37PM -0500, ?? ??? wrote:
> IMHO, for anything on the scale of a doctoral dissertation, a better solution
> would be to develop a native Plan 9 C port of TeX, METAFONT, and LaTeX for
> Plan 9 from Bell Labs. Troff is ill-suited for typesetting mathematics, as
>
Could be worse, they might require using IE on Windows 7 to submit them.
Or perhaps they already do?
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 7:16 PM, ron minnich wrote:
> Irony alert! The Bell Labs journal now requires submissions in *word*.
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 9:58 AM, Francisco J Ballesteros wrote:
> +1 for using parallel mkfiles.
as I say, I liked this too, but it fails the zero changes rule.
But we'll let the guys doing the work make the rules. First one to
produce a useable Go tree wins -- if, that is, they make updates
from
I've done papers and "books" in latex forever (don't want to say how
long). At the time, I was a troff refugee, having gotten annoyed with
troff on unix after a few years.
when I was at lsub last may, I got used to their nice scripts and such
and now would much rather do short papers in troff than
IMHO, for anything on the scale of a doctoral dissertation, a better solution
would be to develop a native Plan 9 C port of TeX, METAFONT, and LaTeX for Plan
9 from Bell Labs. Troff is ill-suited for typesetting mathematics, as anyone
who has tried to use troff to typeset formulas and equations
> And now that the camel is firmly in the tent, we might as well
> create a /camel hierarchy to parallel /ape, for all the
> camel cruft (i.e. /$cputype/camel/make vs. /$cputype/bin/gmake).
shouldn't that be /tent and /$cputype/tent
the camels sneak in the tent, not the other way around.
- erik
I have written books both in latex and in troff.
It's a nightmare, no matter in what, to get things like
indexes and tocs right.
Doing it in troff required me to write a few scripts to
generate some of the tables.
Doing it in latex required me to write a few scripts to
fix up things not handled w
(i.e. /$cputype/camel/make
Yes, I meant /$cputype/bin/camel/make. You get the general idea ...
+1 for using parallel mkfiles.
If they are few, we don't need to import gmake and we could
still build just by adding them to the std tree.
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 6:55 PM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
>>> modify ape/make.
>
>
> I was just waiting for this :-P
>
> Please do NOT fuck with ape/make. As
modify ape/make.
I was just waiting for this :-P
Please do NOT fuck with ape/make. As the paper says, APE has become more
of a tool to write conforming ANSI / POSIX code vs. porting the stuff to
Plan 9. Please don't take apes' virginity.
If people insist on inflicting gmake upon us, fine.
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 5:02 AM, hugo rivera wrote:
> Hi,
> soon I'll begin to write my thesis and I am planing to use troff. I
> previously wrote some documents with it, mostly with the ms macro,
> which I think I'll use for the thesis. Can you advice some book about
> troff with some introduction
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 6:33 AM, Anthony Martin wrote:
> modify ape/make.
That strikes me as a good approach. The Go Makefiles do use very
standard Plan 9 like idioms but there are a few things they do that
looked gmake-dependent to me. There are very few of them however.
ron
I think this is the reference implementation for r7rs as well isn't it?
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 12:24 PM, Bakul Shah wrote:
> Alex Shinn's Chibi-scheme is a r7rs "small" language
> compatible Scheme. It can be used standalone for scripting or
> as a library to provide an extension language. Full
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 12:49 AM, Francisco J Ballesteros wrote:
> Well, that's actually the approach Ron would choose for nix.
> IIRC, there were a bunch of mkfiles added to the std. go tree
> to make it compile, but I may be mistaken.
> Ron knows better.
My first hope was pretty much what others
i think having Go is worth dealing with the beast.
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 6:57 AM, erik quanstrom wrote:
>> IMO using anything other than Make to build
>> the Go distribution is a fool's errand and
>> simply too much of a maintenance burden.
>> We would have to carefully watch upstream
>> changes
> I have had the most recent version of Gmake running as the APE tool of
> choice, but I seem to have misplaced it. Still, no need to treat
> Gmake and ape/make as different, they should be close enough for all
> intents and purposes.
>
> In fact, compiling Gmake itself is not much of a mission,
Thanks for the feedback. I'll have a look at some of those books.
2011/12/2 Steve Simon :
> By far the best books on troff (IMHO) are the pair by Gehani and Lally,
> Document Formatting and Typesetting on the Unix system, volume 1 and 2.
>
> They are out of print but available from alibris.com and
> I plan to switch from GNU Make to APE make
> once I have the time to look closely at the
> Go Makefiles for any GNU specific features
> and then make the necessary changes or even
> modify ape/make.
I have had the most recent version of Gmake running as the APE tool of
choice, but I seem to have
erik quanstrom once said:
> > IMO using anything other than Make to build
> > the Go distribution is a fool's errand and
> > simply too much of a maintenance burden.
> > We would have to carefully watch upstream
> > changes to any of the many Makefiles.
> >
> > Using make isn't as bad as some mak
I plan to switch from GNU Make to APE make
once I have the time to look closely at the
Go Makefiles for any GNU specific features
and then make the necessary changes or even
modify ape/make.
Go makefile use file inclusion and command execution in macro
assignments. I doubt APE make supports thi
> IMO using anything other than Make to build
> the Go distribution is a fool's errand and
> simply too much of a maintenance burden.
> We would have to carefully watch upstream
> changes to any of the many Makefiles.
>
> Using make isn't as bad as some make it out
> to be and, to be clear, I'm on
Pavel Zholkover once said:
> Is the builder going to be based on the native
> build or will it be cross-compiled ?
It will be native.
Anthony
Is the builder going to be based on the native build or will it be
cross-compiled ?
Thanks!
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 8:18 PM, Anthony Martin wrote:
# In other news, I'm working on setting up an
# an automated builder so we can include Plan 9
# in the Go Dashboard.
Lucio De Re once said:
> > Have you tried? It's a non-invasive change, and once they are set
> > up it's unlikely they will need to be updated often.
>
> I think Anthony is on the right path on this point, in that I've had
> to update a couple of mkfiles in the recent past because I had
> overlo
On Fri Dec 2 06:05:23 EST 2011, kokam...@hera.eonet.ne.jp wrote:
> Hi
>
> I just installed 9front on a Celeron 2.8GHz with 1GB mashine
> on a 40GB hard drive. :-) Yes, I just tried it for test.
> (When I used 528MB memory, I was rejected by insufficient memory).
i think that cinap's right. so
Only the cheese stands alone, Unix sup TM.
I wish I had the poster.
On 3 December 2011 00:46, Noah Evans wrote:
> From PJ Plauger when asked about Ratfor:
>
> Q: What's Ratfor?
> PJ: To eat cheese.
>
> Noah
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 2:41 PM, Bruce Ellis wrote:
>> ratfor++ to the rescue!
>>
>From PJ Plauger when asked about Ratfor:
Q: What's Ratfor?
PJ: To eat cheese.
Noah
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 2:41 PM, Bruce Ellis wrote:
> ratfor++ to the rescue!
>
> On 2 December 2011 17:39, ron minnich wrote:
>> A guy I know at LANL just mandated C++ for all codes, no more Fortran.
>>
>> Th
ratfor++ to the rescue!
On 2 December 2011 17:39, ron minnich wrote:
> A guy I know at LANL just mandated C++ for all codes, no more Fortran.
>
> There are no hard and fast rules.
>
> That article is an advertisement, so treat it as such :)
>
> ron
>
--
Don't meddle in the mouth -- MVS (04169
By far the best books on troff (IMHO) are the pair by Gehani and Lally,
Document Formatting and Typesetting on the Unix system, volume 1 and 2.
They are out of print but available from alibris.com and somtimes on
amazon new & used.
-Steve
Hello
This one could be a bit basic for what you want:
http://oreilly.com/openbook/utp/
But a groff version source is public, so you might find it useful.
slds.
gabi
2011/12/2 Aharon Robbins :
>> Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2011 14:02:29 +0100
>> From: hugo rivera
>> To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bel
> Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2011 14:02:29 +0100
> From: hugo rivera
> To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
> Subject: [9fans] troff book
>
> Hi,
> soon I'll begin to write my thesis and I am planing to use troff. I
> previously wrote some documents with it, mostly with the ms macro,
>
Hi,
I would suggest the -mpm macros:
https://131.106.3.253/publications/compsystems/1989/spr_kernighan.pdf
It is basically the same as -ms.
You can build it in plan 9 troff and you can actually use the
resulting binary with heirloom troff as well.
Best of luck,
Simon.
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 2:02
Hi,
soon I'll begin to write my thesis and I am planing to use troff. I
previously wrote some documents with it, mostly with the ms macro,
which I think I'll use for the thesis. Can you advice some book about
troff with some introduction on how to write troff macros?
Saludos y gracias,
--
Hugo
528MB is enougth memory to even compile python and ghostscript
without a swap partition :)
looks like there is some problem with the memory detection. there
was some bug in the e820 code of the bootloader. if the current
iso detects your memory, updating the bootloader on the 9fat
might fix it.
I have a mirrored pair of disks under devfs.
I have a series of 512 byte partitions which
hold different /dev/fs configs, one for mirrored,
one for disk1 only and one for disk2 only. This means
the fossil and venti configs all refer to /dev/fs/XXX and will
work in any mode.
These configs liik lik
> How I can control the cwfs (on the terminal above)? In the Ken's fileserver
> we have a special console to control the fileserver. However, I could not
> find such a console on 9front...
Say, how to make /usr/okamoto directory with uid okamoto, gid okamoto
etc, or /n/abc?
Kenji
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 9:04 AM, wrote:
> Hi
>
> I just installed 9front on a Celeron 2.8GHz with 1GB mashine
> on a 40GB hard drive. :-) Yes, I just tried it for test.
> (When I used 528MB memory, I was rejected by insufficient memory).
>
> I know 9front doesn't add anything new to Plan 9. Ho
Hi
I just installed 9front on a Celeron 2.8GHz with 1GB mashine
on a 40GB hard drive. :-) Yes, I just tried it for test.
(When I used 528MB memory, I was rejected by insufficient memory).
I know 9front doesn't add anything new to Plan 9. However, I'm interested
how they implemented Ken's fs t
Well, that's actually the approach Ron would choose for nix.
IIRC, there were a bunch of mkfiles added to the std. go tree
to make it compile, but I may be mistaken.
Ron knows better.
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 7:42 AM, Lucio De Re wrote:
> I would be interested
> in the approach Nemo might choose f
62 matches
Mail list logo
