ajayshah@alhena.usc.edu (Ajay Shah) (12/05/90)
I believe it's in the public domain. The ftp sites I know didn't seem
to have it.
--
_______________________________________________________________________________
Ajay Shah, (213)734-3930, ajayshah@usc.edu
The more things change, the more they stay insane.
_______________________________________________________________________________ewoods@hemel.bull.co.uk (Eoin Woods) (12/05/90)
ajayshah@alhena.usc.edu (Ajay Shah) writes: >I believe it's in the public domain. The ftp sites I know didn't seem >to have it. No, to the best of my knowledge ditroff is not a public domain program - It is the property of AT&T. Ditroff is supplied with the Documenter's WorkBench (DWB) - see the discussion raging in this group over the price for more information! Anyone know if a PD clone exists ?? Eoin. -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ Eoin Woods, Software Development Group, Bull HN Information Systems, ~ ~ Maxted Road, Hemel Hempstead, Herts HP2 7DZ ~ ~ Tel : +44 442 232222 x4823 ~ ~ Fax : +44 442 234084 ~ ~ < Eoin.Woods@hemel.bull.co.uk > ~ ~ < When do we start news group comp.os.emacs ? :-) > ~
wargaski@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Robert E. Wargaski Jr.) (12/07/90)
In article <1990Dec5.091906.26766@hemel.bull.co.uk>, ewoods@hemel.bull.co.uk (Eoin Woods) writes: |> |> No, to the best of my knowledge ditroff is not a public domain program - |> It is the property of AT&T. |> |> Ditroff is supplied with the Documenter's WorkBench (DWB) - see the |> discussion raging in this group over the price for more information! |> |> Anyone know if a PD clone exists ?? |> |> Eoin. I believe the folks over at GNU have come up with `groff'. The output isn't nearly as good as ditroff, though . . . Rob Wargaski -- Robert E. Wargaski Jr. This is stupid. -- Vila wargaski@nwu.edu When did that ever stop us. -- Avon ACNS DSS, Northwestern University Moooo!
ewoods@hemel.bull.co.uk (Eoin Woods) (12/12/90)
wargaski@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Robert E. Wargaski Jr.) writes: >In article <1990Dec5.091906.26766@hemel.bull.co.uk>, ewoods@hemel.bull.co.uk (Eoin Woods) writes: >|> >|> No, to the best of my knowledge ditroff is not a public domain program - >|> It is the property of AT&T. >|> >|> Ditroff is supplied with the Documenter's WorkBench (DWB) - see the >|> discussion raging in this group over the price for more information! >|> >|> Anyone know if a PD clone exists ?? >|> >|> Eoin. >I believe the folks over at GNU have come up with `groff'. The output >isn't nearly as good as ditroff, though . . . Yes, groff is available from prep.ai.mit.edu (or any of the mirror sites that copy the GNU stuff across) -- I haven't tried to use it yet though, as it needs g++ which isn't on our machine yet!! :-( Eoin. -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ Eoin Woods, Software Development Group, Bull HN Information Systems, ~ ~ Maxted Road, Hemel Hempstead, Herts HP2 7DZ ~ ~ Tel : +44 442 232222 x4823 ~ ~ Fax : +44 442 234084 ~ ~ < Eoin.Woods@hemel.bull.co.uk > ~ ~ < When do we start news group comp.os.emacs ? :-) > ~
rstevens@noao.edu (Rich Stevens) (12/13/90)
In article <1710@casbah.acns.nwu.edu> wargaski@nwu.edu writes: >I believe the folks over at GNU have come up with `groff'. The output >isn't nearly as good as ditroff, though . . . Uh, just what are you basing this claim on ?? I've used both (DWB 2.0, not 3.1) and believe me, I think the groff output is better. It does kerning and has better hyphenation, for example. If you go beyond "ditroff" and look at the whole package (pic, tbl, etc.) things get even better. Rich Stevens
wargaski@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Robert E. Wargaski Jr.) (12/14/90)
In article <1990Dec13.144818.20785@noao.edu> rstevens@noao.edu (Rich Stevens) writes: >In article <1710@casbah.acns.nwu.edu> wargaski@nwu.edu writes: >>I believe the folks over at GNU have come up with `groff'. The output >>isn't nearly as good as ditroff, though . . . > >Uh, just what are you basing this claim on ?? I've used both (DWB 2.0, >not 3.1) and believe me, I think the groff output is better. It does >kerning and has better hyphenation, for example. If you go beyond >"ditroff" and look at the whole package (pic, tbl, etc.) things get >even better. > > Rich Stevens That was the last time I make a statement to the net based on hearsay :-) One of my colleagues here at NU had built -a- version of groff, and my boss said he didn't think the output was as good. James Clark, the author of groff, has already contacted me with the same questions, and I had to eat crow in front of him, as well :-) In any case, I plan to grab the latest release, build it, and come to my own conclusions regarding its output. Rob ``What am I, goofy!?'' Wargski -- Robert E. Wargaski Jr. This is stupid. -- Vila wargaski@nwu.edu When did that ever stop us. -- Avon ACNS DSS, Northwestern University Moooo!