Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 12 Dec 2000 10:23:44 +0200
From:      Ruslan Ermilov <ru@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@cup.hp.com>
Cc:        current@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: Bootstrapping issues with groff(1)
Message-ID:  <20001212102344.B92312@sunbay.com>
In-Reply-To: <3A3509E9.F1D19305@cup.hp.com>; from marcel@cup.hp.com on Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 09:07:53AM -0800
References:  <20001208181908.A12716@sunbay.com> <3A319751.D2C9E5AB@cup.hp.com> <20001209154347.A78374@sunbay.com> <3A329641.CC6D8447@cup.hp.com> <20001211094815.D96665@sunbay.com> <3A3509E9.F1D19305@cup.hp.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 09:07:53AM -0800, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
> Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> > 
> > On Sat, Dec 09, 2000 at 12:29:54PM -0800, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
> > > Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Dec 08, 2000 at 06:22:09PM -0800, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
> > > > > Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The attached patches (p4 and p5) try to solve this bootstrapping
> > > > > > problem with groff(1).
> > > > >
> > > > > Sorry, I missed this statement before. What exactly are the
> > > > > bootstrapping problems you're seeing?
> > > > >
> > > > New groff(1) provides new versions of macro packages and device
> > > > files.  When building, we should use THEM rather than installed
> > > > (obsolete) ones.
> > >
> > > Is the old groff(1) incompatible with the new groff(1) in the sense that
> > > manpages created with the old groff(1) are visibly different from the
> > > manpages created with the new groff(1)?
> > >
> > Once again.  groff(1) supplies macro packages and device description
> > files.  New groff is likely to provide modified files.
> 
> This, I don't care about. We're never going to use an old groff(1) with
> the new files or vice versa. From a usage point of view, I don't care
> about the implementation, just the interface.
> 
> Let me rephrase the question: Did you modify the manpages to get it to
> work with the new groff(1) or is the new groff(1) backward compatible
> with the old groff(1)?
> 
The new groff(1) is not always backwards compatible.  For example, new
groff(1) implements .psbb request internally in troff(1), thus -U flag
is no longer required for part of share/doc, and was removed.  The new
groff(1) also supplies an updated version of doc(7) macro package (the
package we use for manpages), and if you build world with MANBUILDCAT,
you will definitely need the new version of tmac.doc and friends.

OK, I will augment the USRDIRS then, add the groff to bootstrap-tools,
and leave the better (if one exists) implementation to someone else.


Cheers,
-- 
Ruslan Ermilov		Oracle Developer/DBA,
ru@sunbay.com		Sunbay Software AG,
ru@FreeBSD.org		FreeBSD committer,
+380.652.512.251	Simferopol, Ukraine

http://www.FreeBSD.org	The Power To Serve
http://www.oracle.com	Enabling The Information Age


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20001212102344.B92312>