Re: The futur of the roff toolchain

Mr. McKusick,

Kirk McKusick <mckusick_at_mckusick.com> 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 curious to try using
 |heirloom doctools on our book to see if it works. We do some pretty
 |evil things with diversions, so I can easily believe that it will
 |not work. But it would be great if it does work, because the groff
 |in base has some bugs that are annoying to work around.

i would be interested to hear about all bugs for future references.
I will continue to work on the GPLv2 clone of GNU roff -- that
i will maintain -- again in the nearer future, and have brought
that almost in sync with v1.22.3 years before.  (In sync, but
having left off some things which touch code, and that is GPLv3.
Etc.)
I have not seen annoying bugs in my daily, very unscientific
though, use of the FreeBSD version of groff for what can be called
many years.

--steffen
|
|Der Kragenbaer,                The moon bear,
|der holt sich munter           he cheerfully and one by one
|einen nach dem anderen runter  wa.ks himself off
|(By Robert Gernhardt)