From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: peter.jeremy@alcatel.com.au (Peter Jeremy)
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2004 07:43:13 +1000
Subject: [TUHS] Booting v6
In-Reply-To: <20040414165115.GA18257@kurtwerks.com>
References: <200404141546.i3EFkse7006339@skeeve.com>
	<20040414165115.GA18257@kurtwerks.com>
Message-ID: <20040414214313.GY10121@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au>

On 2004-Apr-14 12:51:15 -0400, Kurt Wall <kwall at kurtwerks.com> wrote:
>In a 0.7K blaze of typing glory, Aharon Robbins wrote:
>> Now, were anyone so truly perverse, they might take the latex and
>> convert it into nroff/troff. :-)
>
>Thus returning to the original form in which it was prepared. There's
>an appealing circularity and feeling of having come full circle to
>that...

Actually, I'm surprised that someone (presumably John Lions) re-wrote
the nroff into LaTeX - it would seem easier to have just used troff
for the book.

In order to get that 'original' feel, you'll need to find an
appropriate DECwriter (LA120?).  Remember to hand-write the page
numbers and draw in the lines (and maybe boxes) in chapter 23 by hand.

Whilst you could re-create the appropriate 7x9 (I think) font for a
modern printer - though that will be missing the feel of impact
dot-matrix output: random variations in density and missing dots.

Personally, I think that is over-doing it.  Text is _far_ easier to
read when it's properly typeset using a good looking font (that
includes descenders) at high resolution (>600dpi).  I believe the
visual appearance of the original notes was limited by the technology
available to John Lions in 1977, rather than a deliberate decision to
produce low quality output.

Peter