From owner-freebsd-current Tue Jun 18 17:14:53 1996 Return-Path: owner-current Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id RAA12141 for current-outgoing; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 17:14:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jolt.eng.umd.edu (jolt.eng.umd.edu [129.2.102.5]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id RAA12131 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 17:14:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from skipper.eng.umd.edu (skipper.eng.umd.edu [129.2.98.208]) by jolt.eng.umd.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id UAA10241 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 20:14:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from chuckr@localhost) by skipper.eng.umd.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id UAA02687; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 20:14:45 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 20:14:45 -0400 (EDT) From: Chuck Robey X-Sender: chuckr@skipper.eng.umd.edu To: FreeBSD current Subject: psroff Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Why is there a /usr/bin/psroff? This doesn't seem to be a very useful command, merely a one line front end to groff that forces postscript, and (because it forces the -C compatiblity mode) makes several macro packages break. I ask because there is a real psroff package, and having a psroff interface to groff, it seems to me, just introduces extra confusion, without offering any (that I can see) benefits. The default mode of groff is already to generate postscript, and forcing the compatibility mode doesn't seem to be any win. I'd take it out, if it were me. It's located in /usr/src/gnu/groff/nroff/psroff.sh, and the Makefile there installs it as psroff. ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- Chuck Robey | Interests include any kind of voice or data chuckr@eng.umd.edu | communications topic, C programming, and Unix. 9120 Edmonston Ct #302 | Greenbelt, MD 20770 | I run Journey2 and n3lxx, both FreeBSD (301) 220-2114 | version 2.2 current -- and great FUN! ----------------------------+-----------------------------------------------