[MacPorts] #56313: Please consider removing the conflict between groff and mandoc

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
8 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[MacPorts] #56313: Please consider removing the conflict between groff and mandoc

MacPorts
#56313: Please consider removing the conflict between groff and mandoc
---------------------+--------------------
 Reporter:  teoric   |      Owner:  (none)
     Type:  request  |     Status:  new
 Priority:  Normal   |  Milestone:
Component:  ports    |    Version:
 Keywords:           |       Port:
---------------------+--------------------
 Macports currently declares a conflict between `groff` and `mandoc`.  For
 manpage viewing, this conflict may exist (in the sense that you can only
 use one program at a time for a given command), but can be avoided
 renaming commands.  For typesetting, mandoc is evidently not an
 alternative.  Even the current `mandoc` maintainer agrees it can be useful
 to install both `groff` and `mandoc`, see
 [https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/mandoc/] (quote below):


   Mandoc is neither a full replacement for groff nor intended as such.  It
 is not even aiming to be a real typesetting system.

   In addition to that, and to the aspect [that] mandoc does not support
 many important macro sets nor all of the low-level roff(7) language[],
 there are two more reasons why i need both installed in parallel all the
 time: (1) A small number of manual pages - about 0.25% in the wild - still
 require groff and do not work with mandoc. (2) Having both installed in
 parallel is required for routine output comparisons - mandoc even provides
 a convenience script to do such comparisons.

   Besides, the mandoc build system provides support for renaming several
 of the installed files precisely to allow installation in parallel with
 other `man(1)` implementations (even though i believe that mandoc is a
 full replacement for man-db and similar packages - but conflicts are
 always a pain and can easily be avoided in this case).

--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/56313>
MacPorts <https://www.macports.org/>
Ports system for macOS
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [MacPorts] #56313: Please consider removing the conflict between groff and mandoc

MacPorts
#56313: Please consider removing the conflict between groff and mandoc
----------------------+------------------------
  Reporter:  teoric   |      Owner:  grimreaper
      Type:  request  |     Status:  assigned
  Priority:  Normal   |  Milestone:
 Component:  ports    |    Version:
Resolution:           |   Keywords:
      Port:  mandoc   |
----------------------+------------------------
Changes (by raimue):

 * cc: janstary (added)
 * owner:  (none) => grimreaper
 * status:  new => assigned
 * port:   => mandoc


--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/56313#comment:1>
MacPorts <https://www.macports.org/>
Ports system for macOS
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [MacPorts] #56313: Please consider removing the conflict between groff and mandoc

MacPorts
In reply to this post by MacPorts
#56313: Please consider removing the conflict between groff and mandoc
---------------------------+------------------------
  Reporter:  teoric        |      Owner:  grimreaper
      Type:  enhancement   |     Status:  assigned
  Priority:  Normal        |  Milestone:
 Component:  ports         |    Version:
Resolution:                |   Keywords:
      Port:  groff mandoc  |
---------------------------+------------------------
Changes (by mf2k):

 * type:  request => enhancement
 * port:  mandoc => groff mandoc


Comment:

 Note that a "request" ticket type is only for requesting a new port.

--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/56313#comment:2>
MacPorts <https://www.macports.org/>
Ports system for macOS
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [MacPorts] #56313: Please consider removing the conflict between groff and mandoc

MacPorts
In reply to this post by MacPorts
#56313: Please consider removing the conflict between groff and mandoc
---------------------------+------------------------
  Reporter:  teoric        |      Owner:  grimreaper
      Type:  enhancement   |     Status:  assigned
  Priority:  Normal        |  Milestone:
 Component:  ports         |    Version:
Resolution:                |   Keywords:
      Port:  groff mandoc  |
---------------------------+------------------------
Description changed by ryandesign:

Old description:

> Macports currently declares a conflict between `groff` and `mandoc`.  For
> manpage viewing, this conflict may exist (in the sense that you can only
> use one program at a time for a given command), but can be avoided
> renaming commands.  For typesetting, mandoc is evidently not an
> alternative.  Even the current `mandoc` maintainer agrees it can be
> useful to install both `groff` and `mandoc`, see
> [https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/mandoc/] (quote below):
>

>   Mandoc is neither a full replacement for groff nor intended as such.
> It is not even aiming to be a real typesetting system.
>
>   In addition to that, and to the aspect [that] mandoc does not support
> many important macro sets nor all of the low-level roff(7) language[],
> there are two more reasons why i need both installed in parallel all the
> time: (1) A small number of manual pages - about 0.25% in the wild -
> still require groff and do not work with mandoc. (2) Having both
> installed in parallel is required for routine output comparisons - mandoc
> even provides a convenience script to do such comparisons.
>
>   Besides, the mandoc build system provides support for renaming several
> of the installed files precisely to allow installation in parallel with
> other `man(1)` implementations (even though i believe that mandoc is a
> full replacement for man-db and similar packages - but conflicts are
> always a pain and can easily be avoided in this case).
New description:

 Macports currently declares a conflict between `groff` and `mandoc`.  For
 manpage viewing, this conflict may exist (in the sense that you can only
 use one program at a time for a given command), but can be avoided
 renaming commands.  For typesetting, mandoc is evidently not an
 alternative.  Even the current `mandoc` maintainer agrees it can be useful
 to install both `groff` and `mandoc`, see
 [https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/mandoc/] (quote below):

 > Mandoc is neither a full replacement for groff nor intended as such.  It
 is not even aiming to be a real typesetting system.
 >
 > In addition to that, and to the aspect [that] mandoc does not support
 many important macro sets nor all of the low-level roff(7) language[],
 there are two more reasons why i need both installed in parallel all the
 time: (1) A small number of manual pages - about 0.25% in the wild - still
 require groff and do not work with mandoc. (2) Having both installed in
 parallel is required for routine output comparisons - mandoc even provides
 a convenience script to do such comparisons.
 >
 > Besides, the mandoc build system provides support for renaming several
 of the installed files precisely to allow installation in parallel with
 other `man(1)` implementations (even though i believe that mandoc is a
 full replacement for man-db and similar packages - but conflicts are
 always a pain and can easily be avoided in this case).

--

--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/56313#comment:3>
MacPorts <https://www.macports.org/>
Ports system for macOS
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [MacPorts] #56313: Please consider removing the conflict between groff and mandoc

MacPorts
In reply to this post by MacPorts
#56313: Please consider removing the conflict between groff and mandoc
---------------------------+------------------------
  Reporter:  teoric        |      Owner:  grimreaper
      Type:  enhancement   |     Status:  assigned
  Priority:  Normal        |  Milestone:
 Component:  ports         |    Version:
Resolution:                |   Keywords:
      Port:  groff mandoc  |
---------------------------+------------------------

Comment (by janstary):

 Yes, the mandoc build system provides ways to rename its binaries to
 `mman` etc,
 to not be in a name-conflict with other `man` viewers. See also
 https://trac.macports.org/ticket/53902

 That being said, I have explicitly removed this renaming in
 https://github.com/macports/macports-ports/pull/1183
 and declared a conflict instead. While the coexistence is possible, I
 don't think there's much demand for it.
 The typical use case for having `mandoc` installed is to view manpages
 with it, calling the obvious `man`.

 Indeed, mandoc is a manpage viewer, not a typesetter; it's also a neat
 little standalone application,
 as opposed to groff.

 I believe there's more good in (mandoc's) `man` being called `man` than
 there is in the coexistence with groff.
 That might change if people need/want to have both - for compatibility
 comparison when writing manpages, possibly?
 Currently, groff does not even have a maintainer. That gives me the
 opposite impression.

--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/56313#comment:4>
MacPorts <https://www.macports.org/>
Ports system for macOS
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [MacPorts] #56313: Please consider removing the conflict between groff and mandoc

MacPorts
In reply to this post by MacPorts
#56313: Please consider removing the conflict between groff and mandoc
---------------------------+------------------------
  Reporter:  teoric        |      Owner:  grimreaper
      Type:  enhancement   |     Status:  assigned
  Priority:  Normal        |  Milestone:
 Component:  ports         |    Version:
Resolution:                |   Keywords:
      Port:  groff mandoc  |
---------------------------+------------------------

Comment (by janstary):

 Hm, the actual conflict is in these files:

 * /opt/local/bin/soelim
 * /opt/local/share/man/man1/soelim.1.gz
 * /opt/local/share/man/man7/roff.7.gz

--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/56313#comment:5>
MacPorts <https://www.macports.org/>
Ports system for macOS
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [MacPorts] #56313: Please consider removing the conflict between groff and mandoc

MacPorts
In reply to this post by MacPorts
#56313: Please consider removing the conflict between groff and mandoc
---------------------------+------------------------
  Reporter:  teoric        |      Owner:  grimreaper
      Type:  enhancement   |     Status:  assigned
  Priority:  Normal        |  Milestone:
 Component:  ports         |    Version:
Resolution:                |   Keywords:
      Port:  groff mandoc  |
---------------------------+------------------------

Comment (by janstary):

 https://github.com/macports/macports-ports/pull/1595

--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/56313#comment:6>
MacPorts <https://www.macports.org/>
Ports system for macOS
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [MacPorts] #56313: Please consider removing the conflict between groff and mandoc

MacPorts
In reply to this post by MacPorts
#56313: Please consider removing the conflict between groff and mandoc
---------------------------+------------------------
  Reporter:  teoric        |      Owner:  grimreaper
      Type:  enhancement   |     Status:  closed
  Priority:  Normal        |  Milestone:
 Component:  ports         |    Version:
Resolution:  fixed         |   Keywords:
      Port:  groff mandoc  |
---------------------------+------------------------
Changes (by neverpanic):

 * status:  assigned => closed
 * resolution:   => fixed


Comment:

 [9e435697755d41b541d21bc8919aa26a7ce724f9/macports-ports]

--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/56313#comment:7>
MacPorts <https://www.macports.org/>
Ports system for macOS