(Wondering about the topic, no idea why one would want
to use C++ anyway… but… *shrug*)
Sylvain BERTRAND dixit:
>> This is valid question on other hand e.g. base OpenBSD is C++ free for
>> some time AFAIK (after the removal of groff). Idea of minimal set of
Same for MirBSD (removal of GNU groff in 2004 or so).
>> tools, capable of rebuilding itself is attractive.
>
>Oh! What openbsd uses for its man page terminal renderer? I'm
>stuck with the buggy heirloom tools.
Oh, they’re buggy? Damn. I had hoped for a ditroff
implementation eventually.
I’m using the AT&T nroff from 4.4BSD-Alpha in MirBSD,
which are a full *roff implementation. The tbl cannot
handle enough text diversions to format terminfo(5),
but, with some tweaks, and lots of fixes to the UCB
macropackages, everything else works pretty well.
The code is far from suckless though: typical for its
age, “let’s read everything into static buffers and
hope for the best”, “int is a pointer”, no function
prototypes, you name it. It builds with GCC 3.4.6 -O1
but not -Os or -O2. Fixes welcome (src/usr.bin/oldroff/
in CVS). I did use this on Interix (SFU 3.5), too.
Note this is nroff/troff, i.e. console and line printers
only, and troff is for that typesetter, only. (But the
output, console, converted to HTML with my script for
the MirBSD manpages, and even natively on an Epson FX-80
dot-matrix printer, is decent.) And it’s much slower than
GNU groff on the same hardware (e.g. SPARCstation 5/170)
on the same manual pages (especially -mdoc).
I’ve got a tape archive from the original ditroff,
which I cannot use because of legal issues (someone
in the USA probably can take it as Public Domain).
I did contact the ditroff author, but he could not
help me, nor could Lucent.
bye,
//mirabilos
--
„Cool, /usr/share/doc/mksh/examples/uhr.gz ist ja ein Grund,
mksh auf jedem System zu installieren.“
-- XTaran auf der OpenRheinRuhr, ganz begeistert
(EN: “[…]uhr.gz is a reason to install mksh on every system.”)
