[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[bug #63827] withdraw contrib/pdfmark

From: Keith Marshall
Subject: [bug #63827] withdraw contrib/pdfmark
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2023 06:08:26 -0500 (EST)

Follow-up Comment #1, bug #63827 (project groff):

bug #63133 comment #5: <https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?63133#comment5>
> Bug #63827 is now open to track the removal of pdfmark from the
> groff git repository.  The following is more relevant to that bug,
> but I'm starting it here because it's a reply to a comment here,
> and Keith is already cc:ed here.
> comment #3: <https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?63133#comment3>
> > Agreed.  I have, indeed, added significant new content to
> > pdfmark.pdf, (via pdfmark.ms), and some pdfroff enhancements,
> > which are not now included in groff's contrib/pdfmark tree.
> There have also been 12 commits that have touched groff's
> contrib/pdfmark tree since the 2021-11-13 creation of the OSDN
> pdfmark, according to:
> git log --since 2021-11-13 contrib/pdfmark
> I presume these haven't been reflected in OSDN.
Some have, albeit not in exactly the same manner; some of the others, I will
address shortly.
> Many of them are part of larger changes to the groff code base,
> and may or may not be necessary
Those which impact, primarily, on the build infrastructure, are irrelevant; I
do not use automake, (and will not entertain doing so); I *do* use GNU make,
and make no apology for introducing GNU make specific constructs, within my
> to keep the two interoperating happily, but someone familiar with
> the code will have to make that call for each change.
I'll be happy to look into any concerns; please feel free to bring any to my
attention, either by commenting on this ticket, or by opening one on my OSDN
groff-pdfmark ticket page
<https://osdn.net/users/keith/pf/groff-pdfmark/ticket>; (you may need to
create a personal OSDN account, for the latter).
> (This presumes that the OSDN repository was created from the latest
> groff git contrib/pdfmark at the time;
It was.
> if it was spawned from another source, there might be more
> divergence.)
Everything, up to the date of the fork, I have captured.  Some changes, since
then I already have captured, in some shape or form; some others, (at least
one of which looks suspiciously wrong, to me), I may need to address.


Reply to this item at:


Message sent via Savannah

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]