From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.3 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,HTML_MESSAGE, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,ONE_TIME,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (minnie.tuhs.org [45.79.103.53]) by inbox.vuxu.org (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id d408404c for ; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 15:12:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 82A339D51E; Wed, 19 Feb 2020 01:12:45 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30CB69D51D; Wed, 19 Feb 2020 01:12:18 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ccc.com header.i=@ccc.com header.b="AG7nyqdi"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id E5B409D518; Wed, 19 Feb 2020 01:12:14 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-qk1-f172.google.com (mail-qk1-f172.google.com [209.85.222.172]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D8DCD9CD7A for ; Wed, 19 Feb 2020 01:12:12 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-qk1-f172.google.com with SMTP id a141so9920723qkg.6 for ; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 07:12:12 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ccc.com; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=TE89l1JawgA15R6WCqO+IAwQSXIKJb5xnQy1og4cARA=; b=AG7nyqdiTTFx0k6jjImcNVIRXxykdzwhfCwEBhjkduwmB21hxSdVRc0xFvMwUDhmA0 vVh4iZkrjwlnKHEcP9L5B/EltU3MnUdEnUxEFhrtJM8uoau6OAxauevCSMXcTaMivAdZ ccm+x45fanwFybLgfvkRx0Gfu8gCX76ek6Q/M= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=TE89l1JawgA15R6WCqO+IAwQSXIKJb5xnQy1og4cARA=; b=krq1vY7G61rgb9CSeKbcANfJ9lRYz6NaKlbN9ZtqT//n5CTB/p3ryAjVQj8ywbiaCw hG70G/+6HsLcX5irkcM2gBqvYS5NLDBb81s3hgG8FKBP2jH7B2fS/HK0fF7xP1SAsF0+ XLh/lnSQuhz8AhqbCT5T0oC3rYyArT0lNqA8eLq99ume9YpFkX9Ol4DyIDXahGA51bgm 7O441QmkWPGio4Vyc+GUlgy9bJwJV7ztZqXTebl1sCAnOzfrPWzSc+uejwvIaVD7Yjp1 EGfuAku8I18+k39J/nhUDzfLws48KljqJWxq1mLAeHDoo+oD8oEvfe1vhC7YCWW3Q3ib EuVA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAU5rOLrJemb+kIpJuHq7FLxe4OrmG+FZToFnihyBRjfZv8YZbXL b02RROnoPqGJszcn08it6z2oi05kvQuoIILXVJK0wvB2oqg= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxx0mKT9WteQseoDhtcwD35VOWrY/cVKCXZkbW55swVQTAjR8RqlHMS72WNL1m8xkKRLMKXFpTQXYaMc0cPzwk= X-Received: by 2002:a37:9a0f:: with SMTP id c15mr19797612qke.146.1582038731474; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 07:12:11 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <202002171520.01HFKqKi026749@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> <4d252035b323b7583c5760c952d1982c@firemail.de> <202002171839.01HId8FT1358073@darkstar.fourwinds.com> <202002180017.01I0HI0I1415945@darkstar.fourwinds.com> In-Reply-To: From: Clem Cole Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2020 10:11:45 -0500 Message-ID: To: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000009c5b4f059edb184a" Subject: Re: [TUHS] man Macro Package and pdfmark X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" --0000000000009c5b4f059edb184a Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" hrrmpt... On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 2:40 AM Greg A. Woods wrote: > At Mon, 17 Feb 2020 16:17:18 -0800, Jon Steinhart > wrote: > Subject: Re: [TUHS] man Macro Package and pdfmark > > > > That's my beef with texinfo; there was already > > an existing functional system and rather than making some improvements a > new > > incompatible universe was created. > > Actually there wasn't a truly functional documentation system at the > time -- or at least it didn't reach far enough. > > I.e. there was no open-source [nt]roff compatible program at the time, > and the mainly available proprietary one produced (for quality printing > purposes) only very convoluted hard-coded output for a quite esoteric > and rare piece of equipment. AT&T's public attempt to solve this > (ditroff) just added more cost and arguably less availability. > ditroff was always >>open source<< and any licensee could get it and see it. The problem you are suggesting is that it was not >>free<< i.e. FOSS. AT&T licensed it with a small set of fees. IIRC $1K for the first CPU, an $50 for each and redistribution license was $10K and $5/system. The other issue is you really needed Adobe's transcript package to effectively use it on your Apple Laserwriter and other later PS based printers, as most people lacked actual typesetters. Please remember that >>all<< the Universities with $150 AT&T licensed and a BSD license, had basic troff on their Vaxen with any BSD systems they had. So they all had it for 'free' (and open). I'll accept Larry's previous notes that not all people in those places had access to the sources, but everyone should have had access to the binaries that came with the system. For folks running binary only systems from Masscomp/Sun/DEC/HP/IBM and the like, it is possible it was different. The fact is I know Masscomp supplied ditroff on all systems and just ate the $5 license fee. We also license transcript from Adobe and included that. My memory is that was just a one-time charge and no redistribution. I'm not sure what Sun did, but I think they supplied the BSD troff, vcat and the like (Larry may know for sure). I'm pretty sure HP supplied at least the BSD/vcat family; but they have updated to ditroff. I've forgotten what DEC settled on. By the time of Tru64 it was ditroff on the system, but with Ultrix it may have been you got the troff/vcat off the BSD tape had their was a fee for the ditroff/transcript package. So the basic facts are is that in the Unix ecosystem, the nroff/troff ecosystem was very much around before 1990's groff. Frankly, the biggest thing it did was enabled Linux to have a version of ditroff. I know in my own case, I would (horrors) carry the sources with me for the AT&T package and Transcript for early PC based BSD's. The truth is both packages were (and are) easily findable in dark corners of the Internet. I also request, that we refrain from the seemingly yearly Tex vs. troff war. It's about as productive as the C vs Pascal or C++ vs Java discussions. This thread started as Doug's observation about wanting man pages and issues with Gnu's texinfo scheme. It turns out man was based on the [nr]roff family. The reality is that any document compiler >>could<< have been used. If something other than the roff family was used to create man pages, that would be a different discussion. ... and I like my lawn as it is ... Clem --0000000000009c5b4f059edb184a Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

hrrmpt...

On Tue, Feb = 18, 2020 at 2:40 AM Greg A. Woods <= woods@robohack.ca> wrote:
At Mon, 17 Feb 2020 16:17:18 -0800, Jon Steinhart &= lt;jon@fourwinds.com= > wrote:
Subject: Re: [TUHS] man Macro Package and pdfmark
>
> That's my beef with texinfo; there was already
> an existing functional system and rather than making some improvements= a new
> incompatible universe was created.

Actually there wasn't a truly functional documentation system at the time -- or at least it didn't reach far enough.

I.e. there was no open-source [nt]roff compatible program at the time,
and the mainly available proprietary one produced (for quality printing
purposes) only very convoluted hard-coded output for a quite esoteric
and rare piece of equipment.=C2=A0 AT&T's public attempt to solve t= his
(ditroff) just added more cost and arguably less availability.
di= troff was always >>open source<< and any licensee could get it = and see it.=C2=A0 The problem you are suggesting is that it was not >>= ;free<< i.e. FOSS.=C2=A0 AT&T licensed it with a small set of fee= s. =C2=A0 IIRC $1K for the first CPU, an $50 for each and redistribution li= cense was $10K and $5/system.=C2=A0 The other issue is you really needed Ad= obe's transcript package to effectively use it on your Apple Laserwrite= r and other later PS based printers, as most people lacked actual typesette= rs.

Please remember that >>all<< the Universities with $150 = AT&T licensed and a BSD license, had basic troff on their Vaxen with an= y BSD systems they had. =C2=A0 So they all had it for 'free' (and o= pen).=C2=A0 I'll accept Larry's previous notes that not all people = in those places had access to the sources, but everyone should have had acc= ess to the binaries that came with the system.

For folks running binar= y only systems from Masscomp/Sun/DEC/HP/IBM and the like,=C2=A0it is possib= le it was different.=C2=A0 The fact is I know Masscomp supplied ditroff on = all systems and just ate the $5 license fee. =C2=A0 We also license transcr= ipt from Adobe and included that. =C2=A0 My memory is that was just a one-t= ime charge and no redistribution. =C2=A0 I'm not sure what Sun did, but= I think they supplied the BSD troff, vcat and the like (Larry may know for= sure).=C2=A0 I'm pretty sure HP supplied at least the BSD/vcat family;= but they have updated to ditroff. =C2=A0 I've forgotten what DEC settl= ed on. By the time of Tru64 it was ditroff on the system, but with Ultrix i= t may have been you got the troff/vcat off the BSD tape had their was a fee= for the ditroff/transcript package.

So the basic facts are is that=C2= =A0in the Unix ecosystem, the nroff/troff ecosystem was very much around be= fore 1990's groff. =C2=A0 Frankly, the biggest thing it did was enabled= Linux to have a version of ditroff. =C2=A0 I know in my own case, I would = (horrors) carry the sources with me for the AT&T package and Transcript= for early PC based BSD's. =C2=A0 The truth is both packages were (and = are) easily findable in dark corners of the Internet.

I also request, th= at we refrain from the seemingly yearly Tex vs. troff war. It's about a= s productive as the C vs Pascal or C++ vs Java discussions. This thread sta= rted as Doug's observation about wanting man pages and issues with Gnu&= #39;s texinfo scheme. =C2=A0 =C2=A0 It turns out man was based on the [nr]r= off family.=C2=A0 The reality is that any = document compiler >>could<< have been used.=C2=A0 =C2=A0 If something other than the roff=C2=A0f= amily was used to create man pages, that would be a different discussion.

... and I like my lawn as it is ...

Clem
=
--0000000000009c5b4f059edb184a--