Complete removal of support for cat-pages (Was: catman)

[Valery Ushakov <uwe%stderr.spb.ru@localhost>]

On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 09:56:33 +0100, Thomas Klausner wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 04:55:14AM +0300, Valeriy E. Ushakov wrote:
>
> > Hold your horses!  This started with MKCATPAGES which is ability to
> > pre-generate cat pages as part of the build.
> > 
> > Now it's suddenly about eliminatiing support for cat pages entirely?!
> > 
> > Like, do you plan to remove support for cat pages from man(1) as well?
> 
> No need for strawmen :)

A strawman?  See Kamil's reply from a bit later, quoted just below.


On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 11:33:39 +0100, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:

> As stated in the original post, the goal is to remove .cat pages
> support entirely and implement MANWIDTH without the complexity of
> selecting between man and cat pages.

The original post said (emphasis mine):
http://mail-index.netbsd.org/tech-userlevel/2020/10/25/msg012618.html

| I PROPOSE to drop the support for MKCATPAGES=yes. [...]
[...]
| If we WOULD want to support MANWIDTH we would need to [...]

Thus the original post stated that that goal is to remove
MKCATPAGES=yes support, i.e., specifically, pre-building cat pages at
the build time and shipping them as part of the official sets.

The original post also had some musings about supporting MANWIDTH.  I
don't see an explicit proposal to remove all support for cat pages
from the system.

Please, can you guys figure out between yourselves what exactly you
are proposing and state that in clear terms?  I am not sure if ~anyone
in that original thread (even before it devolved into reminiscing
about the slowest vax on earth) interpreted the original proposal as
"let's completely remove the support for cat pages".


-uwe