GSoC: BSD text tools

[Kostik Belousov]

On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 09:17:01PM +0200, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> 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.

Would it support ps/dvi output ?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 196 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers/attachments/20100524/cd5d9677/attachment.pgp