From owner-freebsd-current Wed Jun 19 10:17:48 1996 Return-Path: owner-current Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id KAA01639 for current-outgoing; Wed, 19 Jun 1996 10:17:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from time.cdrom.com (time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA01630; Wed, 19 Jun 1996 10:17:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from time.cdrom.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.7.5/8.6.9) with ESMTP id KAA24616; Wed, 19 Jun 1996 10:17:32 -0700 (PDT) To: Nate Williams cc: Poul-Henning Kamp , current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: tcl -- what's going on here. In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 19 Jun 1996 09:27:31 MDT." <199606191527.JAA05879@rocky.sri.MT.net> Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 10:17:32 -0700 Message-ID: <24614.835204652@time.cdrom.com> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > Unless you can say that NO-ONE is willing to do the bmake-munging > process for them, then this is a moot point. Apparently Peter already > did, and I don't see a burning need for doing groff. By now you've alraedy read my other responses so I'll not belabor the point. Suffice it to say that I don't see an abundance or scarcity of `bmakers' as the issue so much as I do the difficulty involved. I'd hoped we could get off that treadmill. If it weren't difficult then you wouldn't even have to say: > However, having said that I *will* do groff if you feel that upgrading > groff is more important the the laptop work. This also means that the > current integration work I'm trying to do with Hosokawa will fall even > further behind and make things more difficult later. We could "Just Do It" and it wouldn't be the big bad wolf which requires so much work that you've gotta drop everything to do it. That was merely my point. Jordan