Re: DragonFlyBSD make

[Thomas Nikolajsen <thomas.nikolajsen@xxxxxxx>]

>>The tutorial isn't installed anymore, so link should go; but it is still in our repo:
>>http://gitweb.dragonflybsd.org/dragonfly.git/blob/HEAD:/usr.bin/make/PSD.doc/tutorial.ms
>>(online documented versoin can be found at e.g. http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/pmake/)
s/documented versoin/formatted version/ (my typo)
>
>Thomas, maybe the link in make(1) should only be commented out for now.

OK; I just think we shouldn't refer to a file path which isn't used anymore;
a full reference should be fine.

>Installation of these documents was disabled a long time ago by Hiten or Joerg (IIRC) when groff was >removed from the build-tools. Although you can still go to the directory in src/ and format oneself.

Joerg did it; a little fast IMO.

>The situation might improve, however, now that we have mandoc(1), but I haven't tested it on these >documents.

These documents are using ME or MS roff macro packages, mandoc(1) only support man & mdoc.

>It's true that much of the stuff in src/share/doc is outdated, misleading etc., but there are several >documents which actually contain useful information (such as the PMake one).

Well, I don't see much outdated material, most is documenting 4.4 BSD, which is either still useful,
or has historical interest (for some of us at least).

>We have several options I think:
>
>* Leave things lying around until we utilize mandoc(1) better in favor of groff and then think about >whether installation of the still useful documents should be done again (with mandoc(1) as a build-tool).

mandoc(1) won't be of much use, see above.

If plan is to drop groff from our base, people can still install it (or some other troff(1)) and format documents themselves. We might commit formatted versions, maybe latin1 text & PDF
(or PS, and html and ..) versions.

>* Remove src/share/doc completely (user can dig this information himself on the web).
>
>* Commit formatted versions of the still useful documents and remove the rest.
>
>* ...
>
>I'm favoring the first option but I could live with any of the other ones.

Mee too.

 -thomas