Subject: Re: groff upgrade, anyone? -- now also cvs.
To: J.T. Conklin <email@example.com>
From: Erik Bertelsen <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 03/27/1996 11:11:03
On Tue, 26 Mar 1996, J.T. Conklin wrote:
.. The reason groff has been neglected, was that the changes between 1.08
.. and 1.09 were rather minor, and that 1.10 is "relatively" new. When
.. groff is updated, it should be done in a fashion similar to gcc and
.. libg++ with a script to generate a NetBSD release from a FSF release.
.. This will make it easier to integrate if there ever is a groff 1.11.
This causes me to raise a question that I've been thinking about a couple
of times: Why is cvs in /usr/other/src and not in e.g. /usr/src/usr.bin or
/usr/src/gnu/usr.bin ? If cvs was moved to the /usr/src hierarchy and
given a BSD makefile and a script to produce a NetBSD source tree from the
original FSF source tree, it would be easier for us to keep it up to date.
Anyway I think that cvs is part of the system for developers to use (just
as the compiler tool suite), not just for maintaining the NetBSD sources
I know that this requires some work from somebody that may have many
other things to do, but I think that it will result in a cleaner source
tree. Maybe we could just state that this is the intention, and then
actually have it done when an appropriate person has the resources to do
If the same is done with sup, we would not need /usr/othersrc at all.