>
> Fixed, and reuploaded. because there should be some caching on people.f.o you
> cannot yet see the fixed version but I have fixed it. It is supposed to be a
> monocolumn as far as I understand it.
Yup, that renders fine for me now too.
- [tj]
___
On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 02:07:00PM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 11:45:19AM +, Glen Barber wrote:
> > On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 02:57:33PM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> > > No the problem left is documentations available in share/doc.
> > >
> > > I would like to
On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 01:12:51PM +0100, tj wrote:
> On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 02:07:00PM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> > On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 11:45:19AM +, Glen Barber wrote:
> > > On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 02:57:33PM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> > > > No the problem left is documen
On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 01:12:51PM +0100, tj wrote:
> On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 02:07:00PM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> > On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 11:45:19AM +, Glen Barber wrote:
> > > On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 02:57:33PM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> > > > No the problem left is documen
On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 11:45:19AM +, Glen Barber wrote:
> On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 02:57:33PM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> > No the problem left is documentations available in share/doc.
> >
> > I would like to push them elsewhere. Those documents are mostly useful for
> > historical rea
On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 02:57:33PM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> No the problem left is documentations available in share/doc.
>
> I would like to push them elsewhere. Those documents are mostly useful for
> historical reason (hence we want to keep them) but not really for daily use of
> mode
Mr. McKusick,
Kirk McKusick wrote:
|Thanks for all your work on this project. As I still use roff for
|our book and for many of my presentations, it is a topic of interest
|to me. That said, I am fine with roff dropping out of base as I can
|easily enough bring it in from ports. And I am curi
Kirk McKusick wrote
in <201705232013.v4nkdhn3066...@chez.mckusick.com>:
mc> Thanks for all your work on this project. As I still use roff for
mc> our book and for many of my presentations, it is a topic of interest
mc> to me. That said, I am fine with roff dropping out of base as I can
mc> easi
Thanks for all your work on this project. As I still use roff for
our book and for many of my presentations, it is a topic of interest
to me. That said, I am fine with roff dropping out of base as I can
easily enough bring it in from ports. And I am curious to try using
heirloom doctools on our boo
On 21/5/17 8:57 pm, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
Hi all,
[...]
No the problem left is documentations available in share/doc.
I would like to push them elsewhere. Those documents are mostly useful for
historical reason (hence we want to keep them) but not really for daily use of
modern FreeBSD.
I like all of this. Thanks for your very thorough research and effort.
Eric
On 05/21/2017 07:57, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have been working for a while to try to import a modern roff toolchain into
> base.
>
> I didn't like the initial approach that consisted in simply removing
On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 02:57:33PM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
>
> I would like to change this approach and get back to the initial approach
> taken
> by others before I jumped in and I would like just entirely remove the roff
> toolchain from base and let people rely on GNU roff from ports.
Hi all,
I have been working for a while to try to import a modern roff toolchain into
base.
I didn't like the initial approach that consisted in simply removing all roff
toolchain in base.
Recap of the situation in base:
* We have GNU roff version 1.19.2 in base (latest GPLv2 version). Lots of b
13 matches
Mail list logo
