Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 09:00:01 -0800 (PST) From: Giorgos Keramidas <charon@labs.gr> To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: bin/31392: fmt(1) does format nroff source ... Message-ID: <200111111700.fABH01G06044@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The following reply was made to PR bin/31392; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Giorgos Keramidas <charon@labs.gr> To: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org> Cc: freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org, kurt@boolean.net Subject: Re: bin/31392: fmt(1) does format nroff source ... Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 18:51:43 +0200 Kurt D. Zeilenga <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org> wrote: > At 07:11 PM 2001-11-10, charon@labs.gr wrote: > > > >The rewrite of fmt(1) at revision 1.12 -> 1.13 of fmt.c behaves differently, > >but this is not really a bug. > > I've been using fmt(1) to format [nt]roff files (such as man > pages) for 20 years, fmt has behaved in a certain behavior > manner. While you can argue all you want about which behavior > is more 'correct' or more 'wrong', I argue that changing > historical behavior is plain 'wrong' a very good technical > reason. Where one does have good reason to introduce new behavior, > it should be optional. Or, at least, the historical behavior > is be available as an option. I am not arguing for or against any of the two. I've used fmt in SunOS systems a few years back, but I don't remember if it behaved the same way. I just noted that this is definitely a change in behavior and a likely POLA violation. I'm already reading through the new fmt(1) code to see how easy it is to provide the old behavior. Any patches, are welcome :) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-bugs" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200111111700.fABH01G06044>