[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Groff] Re: groff and solaris
From: |
Jorgen Grahn |
Subject: |
Re: [Groff] Re: groff and solaris |
Date: |
Sat, 5 Apr 2003 18:30:35 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.4i |
On Sat Apr 5 10:33:28 2003, address@hidden wrote:
> So the question is: Why shall someone read the groff man pages
> without groff?
Some reasons, perhaps:
- Setting up groff without forcing man(1) to use it to render man pages is
legitimate use. Maybe the sysadmin doesn't want to/isn't allowed to do
anything more drastic, but still wants to make it available for people who
need groff for serious typesetting.
- Some sysadmins feel protective of the man page concept, as the lowest
common denominator of Unix documentation. Product with missing or "broken"
man pages tend to be crap.
- You shouldn't need program foo' to read its documentation.
On the other hand, I have to admit that the current groff(1) looks very nice
in Postscript...
regards,
/Jörgen
--
// Jörgen Grahn "And then the design was ignored, and small children
\X/ <address@hidden> with crayons were given the O'Reilly Perl books and
told to Create. And lo, it was done."
-- Teo de H, in ASR