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)?
--
Marcel Moolenaar
mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
tel: (408) 447-4222
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
