Larry Kollar wrote:
> Meg McRoberts wrote:
> > Does anyone know the history of mmx? When I started, mmx was the
> > command we used to produce formatted ASCII text from source that
> > used the *roff macros. I got the idea that it was an older tool
> > which was being linked to nroff at about th
Meg McRoberts wrote:
Does anyone know the history of mmx? When I started, mmx was the
command we used to produce formatted ASCII text from source that
used the *roff macros. I got the idea that it was an older tool which
was being linked to nroff at about that time...
I seem to remember rea
Hello
Some of you seems to be Unix veterans. I bought my first computer in
2005. Before this date I did not know how to power on it :).
But I am forty two years old and I know something about other things
and I am able to draw an analogy.
In several occasions, I've attempted to show my point o
mx was the
command we used to produce formatted ASCII text from source that
used the *roff macros. I got the idea that it was an older tool which
was being linked to nroff at about that time...
--- On Tue, 6/1/10, Doug McIlroy wrote:
From: Doug McIlroy
Subject: [Groff] antiquity of troff
To: groff@gn
Doug McIlroy :
> > troff pre-dates C by quite a while
>
> Actually not. C and nroff were contemporary--both debuted in 2nd edition
> Unix.
> troff came in the 3rd edition. Of course nroff was preceded by roff, and
> that by runoff; but neither of those had a | operator, which was the
> triggeri
> troff pre-dates C by quite a while
Actually not. C and nroff were contemporary--both debuted in 2nd edition Unix.
troff came in the 3rd edition. Of course nroff was preceded by roff, and
that by runoff; but neither of those had a | operator, which was the
triggering question. Certainly by the
