Re: [Groff] new groff directory structure

[Werner LEMBERG]

> > > > Maybe groff (the program) shall check how it is called.  If
> > > > arg[0] is, say, groff-1.16.1, it takes the `-1.16.1' postfix
> > > > and appends it to all programs it is calling, i.e.,
> > > > pic-1.16.1, grotty-1.16.1, etc.
> > > 
> > > I do NOT like the idea of groff checking how it is called. For
> > > one thing, it complicates groff for unnecessary reasons.
> 
> Actually, modifying the program's behavior depending on argv[0] is
> against the current GNU coding standards.  I think standards.texi in
> its latest versions mentions this.

Thanks for the info.  So my suggestion is bad.

> > For MSDOS (and Windows?) it might be necessary to replace the
> > scripts with small binaries since batch files don't support pipes,
> > AFAIK.
> 
> This depends on the implementation of the Groff pipeline and of the
> library functions that are called when the pipeline is run by the
> groff driver.  For example, the DJGPP port of Groff will have no
> redirection-related problems with batch files, because it calls the
> shell to run each batch in sequence, and redirects the standard
> handles of the shell.
> 
> There is one problem with batch files, though: that they don't take
> a variable number of arguments too well.  So my vote would be
> against scripts and batch files.

OK.  The planned wrapper programs will be extremely simple: Just
evaluating the GROFF_VERSION environment variable, building a path
with it, and calling a binary using that path.

BTW, do you have code for a similar wrapper program which works on
MS-DOS also?  I'm not too familiar with pipes...

> However, there's a difference between GCC and Groff: GCC users never
> invoke cc1 or cc1plus from the command line.  So they don't need to
> be on your $PATH.  With Groff, this won't work, I think.

So I want to have GROFF_VERSION.  If not set, use a default value
given at compile time.


    Werner