From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 24 19:19:17 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B1281065676 for ; Mon, 24 May 2010 19:19:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from joerg@britannica.bec.de) Received: from www.sonnenberger.org (www.sonnenberger.org [92.79.50.50]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F154A8FC1E for ; Mon, 24 May 2010 19:19:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from britannica.bec.de (www.sonnenberger.org [192.168.1.10]) by www.sonnenberger.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 313BA667BA for ; Mon, 24 May 2010 21:19:14 +0200 (CEST) Received: by britannica.bec.de (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 85D4C1508C; Mon, 24 May 2010 21:17:01 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 24 May 2010 21:17:01 +0200 From: Joerg Sonnenberger To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20100524191701.GA29256@britannica.bec.de> Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org References: <20100524191307.GE216@comcast.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100524191307.GE216@comcast.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Subject: Re: GSoC: BSD text tools X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 May 2010 19:19:17 -0000 On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 12:13:07PM -0700, Charlie Kester wrote: > I welcome this change, but groff is used for much more than manpages. > What happens to pic, tbl, and the other troff-related "little > languages"? How can you say mdocml is "completely replacing" groff if > it doesn't support those kinds of things? tbl(1) is going to be supported fully at some point in the future. It is work-in-progress. I am not sure if pic(1) is actually used beyond the groff documentation, at least I don't remember anything in NetBSD where I checked. Similiar usage is found for eqn(1). > Is the thinking that groff has only been in base to support manpages? > If so, this project makes sense. But even so, some clarification of the > intent is needed. The use of (g)roff for anything but man pages is practically non-existent. If you want to use it for typesetting, you can always install it. Joerg