Date: Tue, 19 May 2015 13:26:46 +0200 From: Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@freebsd.org> To: "Julian H. Stacey" <jhs@berklix.com> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Replace gnu groff in base by heirloom doctools Message-ID: <20150519112644.GB52236@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> In-Reply-To: <201505152342.t4FNgRgq076946@fire.js.berklix.net> References: <20150514000211.GA9410@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> <201505152342.t4FNgRgq076946@fire.js.berklix.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--pvezYHf7grwyp3Bc Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 01:42:26AM +0200, Julian H. Stacey wrote: > Hi Bapt & current@ >=20 > > I think keeping a fully functionnal roff(7) toolchain part of the > > base system is very good on a unix. >=20 > Yes, Unix has always also been a tool to get jobs done (aka PWB), > as well as merely recompile more Unix. Ditto FreeBSD. =20 >=20 >=20 > > From what I could check I cannot find any regression when migrating fro= m gnu > > groff to heirloom doctools, if there is a particular area when you thin= k extra > > care is needed please share it. > >=20 > > Heirloom doctools: https://github.com/n-t-roff/heirloom-doctools >=20 >=20 > Regression tests that use public BSD source & data to build more > BSD are a good start, but just a start, insufficient to discover > all problems. There's non public user data sets to consider. >=20 > Many users won't read current@, just announce@, so before removal > hits a Release, we need a one Release warning, ie "This is the last > Release before old functionality goes. >=20 > Assume lots of user data will Not be compatible with heirloom-doctools > & users wont know to start checking their data, until they see an > announcement in the next Release. Those users would be able to use groff from ports and then have the benefit= of a more up to date version of groff and a groff with more functionnality than = the castrated version we do have in base while compatible. >=20 > We'll need a copy of same version of existing tools, macros etc, copied o= ut > unchanged to a port or meta port so users affected have a lifeboat. groff is already in ports. >=20 > User data Will break: (My groff usage frequently broke when groff > changed: I use groff for CV, business card, letters, invoices, & > personal, with embedded pics, scaled & offset figures, tables, > fonts, sizes, & ouput in all of txt ps pdf pcl & html output.) Solved by using groff from ports. >=20 > Unfortnately I have'nt time to help test with my data as FreeBSD > already eats too much time, shoving bind from src to ports (+planning > to dump bind & move on) + ripping majordomo & acroread out of ports, > all of which I need & must restore before upgrading servers & > workstations. >=20 > Changes would need maximal warning & minimum disruption please. Groff in base is rottening for various reasons and lacks lots of the featur= es provided by a full groff. Using groff from ports is a win for user realying on groff specific toolcha= in. Heirloom in base is a win over groff because it has better support for roff= (7) better font handling etc. Best regards, Bapt --pvezYHf7grwyp3Bc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iEYEARECAAYFAlVbHfQACgkQ8kTtMUmk6ExHdACfdlKRwh9AlwjS+DLsPdPYl7QJ FfEAnAuSdVK1nB+CDq0dHNga0vVU9MVF =ke7N -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --pvezYHf7grwyp3Bc--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20150519112644.GB52236>