Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 13:00:15 -0700 From: "Devon H. O'Dell" <dodell@offmyserver.com> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Cc: Emanuel Strobl <Emanuel.strobl@gmx.net>, Lyndon Nerenberg <lyndon@orthanc.ca> Subject: Re: groff alternative? Message-ID: <42AF374F.3000705@offmyserver.com> In-Reply-To: <20050614185923.GA12375@dragon.NUXI.org> References: <200504262010.49509@harrymail> <20050429200029.GC232@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au> <F569DB909C927A00B6933382@peregrin.orthanc.ca> <200506141824.17451@harrymail> <20050614185923.GA12375@dragon.NUXI.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
David O'Brien wrote: > On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 06:24:07PM +0200, Emanuel Strobl wrote: > >>today I read a news article (http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/60600) >>about OpenSolaris beeing released, but is there also the groff alternative >>included? >>I'd love to see a lean replacment for our current gnu version. > > > Before everyone gets all happy thinking we can incorporate all kinds of > bits from Open Solaris - one should read the license agrement first. > > COMMON DEVELOPMENT AND DISTRIBUTION LICENSE Version 1.0 > .. > 3.1. Availability of Source Code. > Any Covered Software that You distribute or otherwise make available > in Executable form must also be made available in Source Code form > and that Source Code form must be distributed only under the terms of > this License. > > this puts the CDDL1.0 in the same boat as GPL'ed code from a BSD stand > point. Would troff/nroff/ps/pdf utilities from Plan 9 be usable? The license isn't as restrictive. They do compile, though I think there was a bit of weirdness with the ps/pdf conversion stuff the last time I heard from someone doing this for DragonFly. --Devon
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?42AF374F.3000705>