[TUHS] licence of ditroff?

[TUHS] licence of ditroff?

[Aharon Robbins]

Instead of starting with 27 year old code, you'd be better
off taking the troff from http://www.swtch.com/plan9port.

This is a port of many Plan 9 utilities to Unix.  The troff there
(a) has an explicit license that will probably do for the BSD people
(b) already knows how to produce PostScript
(c) can handle UTF-8 and 16-bit Unicode

Arnold

> Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 12:39:47 +0000 (UTC)
> From: Thorsten Glaser <tg at 66h.42h.de>
> Subject: [TUHS] licence of ditroff?
> To: martinwguy at yahoo.it
> Cc: tuhs at minnie.tuhs.org, miros-discuss at 66h.42h.de
>
> Hi!
>
> I would like to know which licence the files at
> http://medialab.dyndns.org/~martin/tape/stuff/ditroff/
> are under.
>
> If it's http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Caldera-license.pdf
> that would be nice, if not, is there any way to find
> out whose (c) is on the files, and how to contact them?
>
> Reason: I'm developer of a BSD offspring and already
> integrated 4.4BSD-Alpha nroff, neqn, tbl etc. under the
> Caldera licence above into our operating system in order
> to get rid of the less free, written in C++, GNU groff.
> With success. Now I'm lacking postscript output.
>
> Thanks in advance,
> //mirabile
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs

[TUHS] licence of ditroff?

[Thorsten Glaser]

Aharon Robbins dixit:

>Instead of starting with 27 year old code, you'd be better
>off taking the troff from http://www.swtch.com/plan9port.

Thanks, that's a nice idea, but from what I experienced,
the portability of recent AT&T/Bell/Lucent/whatever code
is worse than the bugs in old code (eg. I could not get
ksh93 to compile, something in there just dumped core;
but then that's Unix, not Plan 9).

>This is a port of many Plan 9 utilities to Unix.  The troff there
>(a) has an explicit license that will probably do for the BSD people

If it's the same licence as for 8c, then no, unfortunately.

>(b) already knows how to produce PostScript

That's a must for replacing the current oldroff (nroff).

>(c) can handle UTF-8 and 16-bit Unicode

That's pretty neat ;)


bye,
//mirabile

[TUHS] licence of ditroff?

[Thorsten Glaser]

Aharon Robbins dixit:

>I don't know.  It's worth double checking the current license; it
>changed sometime in the past year or two.
>
>The Plan 9 troff is certainly a descendant of the ditroff you
>found, for whatever that's worth.

Okay, looks like it's really worth digging into this.

But (for the rest of the audience) not until after the
next stable release, MirOS #8, is out of the doors.

bye,
//mirabile

[TUHS] licence of ditroff?

[Aharon Robbins]

> Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 17:50:26 +0000 (UTC)
> From: Thorsten Glaser <tg at 66h.42h.de>
> Subject: Re: [TUHS] licence of ditroff?
> To: Aharon Robbins <arnold at skeeve.com>
> Cc: martinwguy at yahoo.it, miros-discuss at 66h.42h.de, tuhs at minnie.tuhs.org
>
> Aharon Robbins dixit:
>
> >Instead of starting with 27 year old code, you'd be better
> >off taking the troff from http://www.swtch.com/plan9port.
>
> Thanks, that's a nice idea, but from what I experienced,
> the portability of recent AT&T/Bell/Lucent/whatever code
> is worse than the bugs in old code (eg. I could not get
> ksh93 to compile, something in there just dumped core;
> but then that's Unix, not Plan 9).

ksh93 is a different animal, from a different group, and problems
there are not surprising (sadly).

On the flip side, they do take bug reports seriously.

> >This is a port of many Plan 9 utilities to Unix.  The troff there
> >(a) has an explicit license that will probably do for the BSD people
>
> If it's the same licence as for 8c, then no, unfortunately.

I don't know.  It's worth double checking the current license; it
changed sometime in the past year or two.

The Plan 9 troff is certainly a descendant of the ditroff you
found, for whatever that's worth.

Arnold

[TUHS] licence of ditroff?

[Thorsten Glaser]

Hi!

I would like to know which licence the files at
http://medialab.dyndns.org/~martin/tape/stuff/ditroff/
are under.

If it's http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Caldera-license.pdf
that would be nice, if not, is there any way to find
out whose (c) is on the files, and how to contact them?

Reason: I'm developer of a BSD offspring and already
integrated 4.4BSD-Alpha nroff, neqn, tbl etc. under the
Caldera licence above into our operating system in order
to get rid of the less free, written in C++, GNU groff.
With success. Now I'm lacking postscript output.

Thanks in advance,
//mirabile