Re: RFC vgrind in base (and buildworld)

On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 10:58:25AM +0100, Gary Jennejohn wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 23:20:09 +0100
> Ulrich Sp?rlein <uqs_at_freebsd.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 20.01.2011 at 21:17:40 +0100, Ulrich Sp?rlein wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > > 
> > > Currently our buildworld relies on groff(1) and vgrind(1) being present
> > > in the host system. I have a patch ready that at least makes sure these
> > > are built during bootstrap-tools and completes the WITHOUT_GROFF flag.
> > > 
> > > vgrind(1) is only used for two papers under share/doc and we could
> > > easily expand the results and commit them to svn directly, alleviating
> > > the need to run vgrind(1) during buildworld.
> > > 
> > > OTOH, there are much more useful tools to vgrind(1) for source code
> > > formatting. So do we still have vgrind(1) users out there?
> > > 
> > > Regards,
> > > Uli
> > 
> > [trying to get this thread back on track]
> > 
> > Does anyone actually care about vgrind in base? Will people be angry if
> > I unroll the 2 cases where it is used under share/doc?
> > 
> 
> I personally have never used vgrind, but since it's available as part of
> /usr/ports/textproc/heirloom-doctools IMO it would be safe to remove it
> from base, maybe with a note in UPDATING.

AFAICT, heirloom-doctools does not work on 64-bit platforms.
vgrind may be ok but nroff and troff die rather quickly with
a segfault when it tries to use a macro package such as mdoc.

-- 
Steve