Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!mcgill-vision!bloom-beacon!eru!luth!sunic!tut!santra!mcsun!hp4nl!star.cs.vu.nl!ast
From: ast@cs.vu.nl (Andy Tanenbaum)
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
Subject: Re: new nroff (what's the story)
Message-ID: <5057@ast.cs.vu.nl>
Date: 7 Jan 90 14:58:39 GMT
References: <7436@nigel.udel.EDU>
Organization: Fac. Wiskunde & Informatica, VU, Amsterdam
Lines: 41

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)