GSoC: BSD text tools
joerg at britannica.bec.de
Mon May 24 19:19:17 UTC 2010
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.
More information about the freebsd-hackers