From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 29 20:00:41 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A32116A4CE for ; Fri, 29 Apr 2005 20:00:41 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail16.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail16.syd.optusnet.com.au [211.29.132.197]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66C4043D58 for ; Fri, 29 Apr 2005 20:00:40 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from PeterJeremy@optushome.com.au) Received: from cirb503493.alcatel.com.au (c211-30-75-229.belrs2.nsw.optusnet.com.au [211.30.75.229]) j3TK0WLe032439 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Sat, 30 Apr 2005 06:00:34 +1000 Received: from cirb503493.alcatel.com.au (localhost.alcatel.com.au [127.0.0.1])j3TK0WXw006751; Sat, 30 Apr 2005 06:00:32 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from pjeremy@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au) Received: (from pjeremy@localhost)j3TK0U2f006750; Sat, 30 Apr 2005 06:00:30 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from pjeremy) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 06:00:30 +1000 From: Peter Jeremy To: Alex Zbyslaw Message-ID: <20050429200029.GC232@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au> References: <200504262010.49509@harrymail> <86k6mo0xmh.fsf@xps.des.no> <427157B7.6040203@mac.com> <200504290053.51912@harrymail> <427177FD.50809@dial.pipex.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <427177FD.50809@dial.pipex.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2i cc: Emanuel Strobl cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: groff alternative? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 20:00:41 -0000 On Fri, 2005-Apr-29 00:55:41 +0100, Alex Zbyslaw wrote: >Since no-one had a sensible answer, why not try a version of original >nroff from say 4.3BSD. Hunting around, I found this: >http://www.tuhs.org/. Hopefully the most used macros will have stayed >the same. Actually, they haven't. The FreeBSD man pages are written using mdoc(7), not man(7). The current version of mdoc(7) in FreeBSD needs long names - which are supported by ditroff and groff but not the older nroff. I don't believe the nroff in either 4.3BSD or 2.11BSD can support long names and neither include a mdoc(7) implementation. 4.4BSD includes mdoc(7) but also GNU groff - though a quick look at the tmac.mdoc* files suggests that it might work with an old (4.3 or 2.11) nroff. If you're only worried about ports, most of those will use man(7), not mdoc(7) - though there are probably a few that use mdoc(7). -- Peter Jeremy