Leisner.Henr@xerox.com (Marty) (01/05/90)
Does the new nroff Andy posted supercede all previous versions of nro? I'm trying to look at the man page on my sun386i without success. ditroff crunched on it for 2 minutes without finishing and produced over 2 megabytes of output. I used nroff -man and it seemed to send it into an infinite loop. I finally found tmac.an (in the nroff.mail) file and tried that -- it didn't produce anything better than the raw roof file. Are there any standard Unix formatters around which an handle the nroff.1 man page? In addition, the MANIFEST page is not accurate -- it probably shouldn't have been included. Also nroff2.cdif and nroff3.cdif don't apply to any files in the nroff directory. What's going on here? marty ARPA: leisner.henr@xerox.com GV: leisner.henr NS: leisner:wbst139:xerox UUCP: hplabs!arisia!leisner
bl@infovax.UUCP (Bj|rn Larsson) (01/06/90)
In article <7436@nigel.udel.EDU> Leisner.Henr@xerox.com (Marty) writes: >I'm trying to look at the man page on my sun386i without success. ditroff >crunched on it for 2 minutes without finishing and produced over 2 >megabytes of output. > >I used nroff -man and it seemed to send it into an infinite loop. > >I finally found tmac.an (in the nroff.mail) file and tried that -- it >didn't produce anything better than the raw roof file. >What's going on here? > Well, I grabbed the 1.5.0 nroff, put it on (horror!) DOS, wrote my own makefile and made it. Essentially no changes to the code - I think I changed some of the defaults - and everything worked very nicely with 'nroff -man nroff.1'. Maybe you did not put the tmac.an file in /usr/lib/tmac, or did not set the TMACDIR environment variable? I mean, if it took me two hours to get it running under DOS, including reading the unformatted man page... there cannot be any problems really. BUT: many of the commands etc described in the man page are actually not implemented. This does not only apply to those that are marked as 'extension' or 'unimplemented' in the man page. No, I haven't done it on MINIX, since I only have a semiworking 1.2 running on floppies... Bjorn -- ====================== InfoVox = Speech Technology ======================= Bjorn Larsson, INFOVOX AB : ...seismo!mcvax!kth!sunic!infovax!bl Box 2503 : bl@infovox.se S-171 02 Solna, Sweden : Phone (+46) 8 735 80 90
ast@cs.vu.nl (Andy Tanenbaum) (01/07/90)
In article <7436@nigel.udel.EDU> Leisner.Henr@xerox.com (Marty) writes: >Does the new nroff Andy posted supercede all previous versions of nro? Yes. There are a couple of versions that have been floating around, all of them pretty weak. The only version I have now has the following crcs: 56210 855 MANIFEST 15277 1168 Makefile 47655 1268 Makefile.bsd 34721 1195 Makefile.st 14211 1841 README 36142 16799 command.c 26306 17014 escape.c 36096 3444 io.c 37121 10846 low.c 57531 9095 macros.c 64833 15920 main.c 60834 20809 nroff.1 31603 13272 nroff.h 04094 6960 nroff.mail 27647 4920 strings.c 42450 11452 text.c 05187 292 version.h > > >In addition, the MANIFEST page is not accurate -- it probably shouldn't >have been included. Yes. Sorry. >What's going on here? Mostly that I haven't been paying a lot of attention to nroff. Since I have access to more Sun workstations, SPARCservers and the like than I can count any more, I never use MINIX nroff, which increases the chance of my blowing it. The low quality of the initial version didn't help. I believe someone is still working on it for the ST, but this may or may not fit on the PC. If some motivated person wants to take up the cause and sort all this out, I am sure it will be appreciated by many. Since I have MANY other things to do now and don't really need nroff, it sort of has a low priority with me. Andy Tanenbaum (ast@cs.vu.nl)