Skip to content
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
1 change: 1 addition & 0 deletions Formula/m/mandoc.rb
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -90,6 +90,7 @@ def install
ENV.deparallelize do
system "make"
system "make", "install"
system "make", "lib-install"
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It is avoided, but if there is no option and is required by others, then I think we could.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Copy link
Author

@cvengler cvengler Oct 20, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I am currently working on a roff toolchain in Rust. As far as I am aware, libmandoc is the only library that exists for the purpose.

I get your point, but given the monopoly of the library, I disagree.

Besides, I am using it to get an AST. While the mandoc program offers -Ttree, parsing this is rather inconvenient compared to a C tree structure.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think if upstream actively tells people not to use the library, we shouldn't ship either.

Copy link
Author

@cvengler cvengler Oct 21, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I disagree.
To me, what upstream is trying to imply is an eternal zerover and we do ship zerover things too.
Besides, development in mandoc is fairly slow these days, last release has been done 4 years ago.
Its not dead, the CVS repo has activity, but the release cycle is slow.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

For that reason, using that interface is not particularly recommended. If possible for the intended purpose, it is preferable and certainly much more robust to fork and execute a mandoc(1) child process.

I don't think this is "telling people not to use it".

I think this is a case where we should install the library, avoid using it ourselves and provide a caveat instead. Perhaps we install to libexec or something if we want to make it hard for us to use it ourselves.

Copy link
Author

@cvengler cvengler Oct 21, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

FWIW, Linuxland is fairly undecided here.
Alpine for example packages it, Void Linux does not, and Debian does the Debian way by offering libmandoc-dev.

I think the decision of people to not package stems more from not knowing it exists, rather than actively refusing to, but that is an assumption, given the fact that it is rarely used.

end
end

Expand Down
Loading