Re: groff NetBSD relevance (was Re: Re: Re: Request to reconsider removal of groff from base system)
(I would not complain if other obnoxious uses of C++, particularly newly
added ones that greatly increase build time, left our tree, on the other
hand...)
Thor
Maybe NetBSD might like how FreeBSD does it:
https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base/head/Makefile.inc1?revision=280992view=markup
.if ${MK_GROFF} != no
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=src.confapropos=0sektion=5manpath=FreeBSD+10.1-RELEASEarch=defaultformat=html
SRC.CONF(5) FreeBSD File Formats Manual
SRC.CONF(5)
NAME
src.conf -- source build options
DESCRIPTION
The src.conf file contains settings that will apply to every build
involving the FreeBSD source tree; see build(7).
I don't see src.conf with
http://netbsd.gw.com/cgi-bin/man-cgi?src.conf+5+NetBSD-current
I cant browse NetBSD source with eg
http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/src/Makefile?rev=1.312content-type=text/x-cvsweb-markuponly_with_tag=HEAD
http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/~checkout~/src/Makefile.inc?rev=1.4content-type=text/plainonly_with_tag=MAIN
So downloading
http://ftp7.de.netbsd.org/pub/ftp.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD/NetBSD-6.1.5/source/sets/src.tgz
Cheers,
Julian
--
Julian Stacey, BSD Linux Unix C Sys Eng Consultant Munich http://berklix.com
Indent previous with . Reply Below as a play script.
Send plain text, Not quoted-printable, HTML, or base64.
RE: Re: Re: Request to reconsider removal of groff from base system
Again this is an enhancement? Can mandoc handle tbl and pic input? UNIX has had the *roff tool suite for a long time. A text formatter is how they got support from management to continue work on UNIX. I doubt we would be talking about UNIX today if it wasn't for the suite. If you still want this OS to stay relevant to people looking an alternative to M$ you should be hyping the formatting tools that come with it more. They are very powerful tools for those who want to learn them. I have done documents ranging from simple letters to forms that my boss said needed a Desktop Publish Packager to do. And he has been using UNIX as long as I have. He, like most others, considered them outdated and useless, I find it far easier to remember a handfull of dot commands than to search through menus and button bars that change wither every new release of the office tools. All of my opinions are my own and do not in ANY way reflect those of the company I work for. Ron From: netbsd-users-ow...@netbsd.org [netbsd-users-ow...@netbsd.org] on behalf of carsten.ku...@arcor.de [carsten.ku...@arcor.de] Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2015 02:25 To: netbsd-users@NetBSD.org Subject: Aw: Re: Re: Request to reconsider removal of groff from base system Thor Lancelot Simon t...@panix.com wrote: mandoc(1) does not process roff. Very simplified described it acts somehow like nroff -mandoc ... or troff -mandoc There it understands a large subset of the nroff/troff language. (Only a few useres need real nroff/troff for typesetting other documents than manpages.) Carsten Notice: This communication, including attachments, may contain confidential or proprietary information to be conveyed solely for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, or if you otherwise received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and promptly delete this e-mail, including attachments, without reading or saving them in any manner. The unauthorized use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this e-mail, including attachments, is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
groff NetBSD relevance (was Re: Re: Re: Request to reconsider removal of groff from base system)
On Tue, Apr 07, 2015 at 11:27:02AM +, Ron Swiernik wrote: Again this is an enhancement? Can mandoc handle tbl and pic input? UNIX has had the *roff tool suite for a long time. A text formatter is how they got support from management to continue work on UNIX. I doubt we would be talking about UNIX today if it wasn't for the suite. There can be no denying that the MS office suite has serious usability problems (not to mention problems with usefulness, relevance, and resilience), but I don't think a batch-oriented system using dot commands is any kind of improvement. I don't think that arguments whether one old technology (MS Office is, by now, rather long in the tooth) is an improvement or not over an older technology (just how old is *roff?) really advance the project. Document preparation is important. Deleting the only or best document preparation system in NetBSD (supposing that is even what's going on) is pretty lame, but it seems to me that neither *roff nor an MS Office knock-off will buy UNIX much relevance in 2015. What's next? Dave -- David Young dyo...@pobox.comUrbana, IL(217) 721-9981
Aw: RE: Re: Re: Request to reconsider removal of groff from base system
Again this is an enhancement? Can mandoc handle tbl and pic input? It can handle tbl input. I'm not shure about pic but there may not be many manpages using pic. UNIX has had the *roff tool suite for a long time. A text formatter is how they got support from management to continue work on UNIX. I doubt we would be talking about UNIX today if it wasn't for the suite. This is all true. And no one intends to remove groff. But it should not make a difference if groff is in the base or you need just a simple pkgin install groff to get it, so the situation would not change much from now.
Re: RE: Re: Re: Request to reconsider removal of groff from base system
On Tue 07 Apr 2015 at 13:57:45 +0200, carsten.ku...@arcor.de wrote: Again this is an enhancement? Can mandoc handle tbl and pic input? It can handle tbl input. I'm not shure about pic but there may not be many manpages using pic. Various X manual pages are mishandled in NetBSD 6. I looked though them quicky and among them are Fc* with .fi in the formatted output in the SYNOPSIS and here and there some missing other stuff: FcConfigGetFonts(3)FcConfigGetFonts(3) NAME FcConfigGetFonts - Get config font set SYNOPSIS #include fontconfig.h FcFontSet * FcConfigGetFonts(FcConfig *config); (FcSetName set); .fi and XAllocSizeHints(3) and I think some other pages cntain mishandled tables or somesuch: STRUCTURES The XSizeHints structure contains: /* Size hints mask bits */ #define .el USPosition(1L 0) /* user specified x, y */ #define .el USSize(1L 1) or for example XAllocWMHints(3): STRUCTURES The XWMHints structure contains: /* Window manager hints mask bits */ #define .el InputHint (1L 0) #define .el StateHint (1L 1) #define .el IconPixmapHint (1L 2) Either these pages are invalid mandoc or the formatter is not complete. Either way something needs to be fixed. -Olaf. -- ___ Olaf 'Rhialto' Seibert -- The Doctor: No, 'eureka' is Greek for \X/ rhialto/at/xs4all.nl-- 'this bath is too hot.' pgpyGoPDvG_Jm.pgp Description: PGP signature
