Re: Maintenance or successors? (was Re: Buffer overflow in the StringQuotedWord() function)

Thank you, I had a look in the make file and I think that I can=20
understand it. By the way discovered Lout thank to your book on Pyqt=20
many years ago.

Kind regards

Yannig

On 18/12/2020 16:41, Mark Summerfield wrote:
> Building Lout means you have to edit the Makefile.
> This isn't difficult as such but you have to be _very_ careful since
> some of the directories you must specify must exist -- and some must no=
t
> exist.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> On Fri, 18 Dec 2020 16:17:34 +0100
> Yannig Robert via "Users of the Lout document typesetting system."
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hello all,
>>
>>
>> Even if I just started using it a year ago (a bit late to the party!),=
 I
>> am really glad that Lout is living on as unlike Latex I seem to be abl=
e
>> to use it without loosing my sanity!
>>
>> There were talks earlier that Debian was dropping Lout. Does this mean=
s
>> that those of us who use a Debian based OS soon will need to compile i=
t
>> ? Are there instructions somewhere for those like me who aren't expert=
s?
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Yannig
>>
>>
>> On 18/12/2020 06:01, William Bader wrote:
>>> I have a version of lout with the CVEs fixed at
>>> https://github.com/william8000/lout
>>> <https://github.com/william8000/lout> The repository has commits for
>>> all of the lout 3.xx releases that I could find and then a final
>>> commit that fixes the CVEs and updates the release to 3.41.
>>> I can try to fix future bugs and CVEs as they are reported.
>>> Regards, William
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------=
---
>>> *From:* Lout-users
>>> <[email protected]> on behalf =
of
>>> Ludovic Court=C3=A8s <[email protected]>
>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 16, 2020 5:59 AM
>>> *To:* Mark Carroll <[email protected]>
>>> *Cc:* [email protected] <[email protected]>
>>> *Subject:* Re: Maintenance or successors? (was Re: Buffer overflow in
>>> the StringQuotedWord() function)
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Mark Carroll <[email protected]> skribis:
>>>  =20
>>>> Thank you very much indeed for all the work already done on Lout,
>>>> it's a real gem, both in software and documentation. Unfortunately,
>>>> I have not used C (or C++) much since the nineties so I rather doubt
>>>> that I am suited to attempt to safely address outstanding CVEs; my
>>>> recent history is in fixing Java ones instead! Might somebody else
>>>> be up for the catchup and ongoing maintenance work? Otherwise, I
>>>> hope that this is not badly off-topic: If Basser Lout is no longer
>>>> maintained then I suppose it raises the question of if anyone here
>>>> has migrated to anything that does not pale in comparison, is there
>>>> any agreeable successor? Maybe there is some other mailing list
>>>> worth following about the wider state of document formatters?
>>>>
>>>> I've used Lout for my own documents but, in using things like XeTeX
>>>> with TikZ in the day job and such, I've yet to find a match for
>>>> Lout's sheer cleanliness, it is positively a pleasure to use; I
>>>> guess the functional approach really works, a worthwhile research
>>>> experiment indeed. At least after I have employed tips from others
>>>> about getting it to recognize various kinds of fonts, Basser Lout is
>>>> one of the few pieces of software I use where the surprises tend to
>>>> be more pleasant than not. "I wonder if this would work? Yes, it
>>>> does!"
>>> I=E2=80=99m late to the discussion but I agree with everything you wr=
ote:
>>> having used LaTeX (+ Beamer, etc.) for some time now, it always feels
>>> clunky and brittle compared to Lout.=C2=A0 The functional approach of=
 Lout
>>> makes it much more pleasant to work with, and more predictable too.
>>>
>>> I=E2=80=99m not aware of any other functional document formatting too=
l.
>>>  =20
>>>> I wonder if I'll end up seeing how far I can get with Haskell's
>>>> bindings to Cairo and if useful guidance would come from the text
>>>> about Nonpareil which, admittedly, it's a long time since I looked
>>>> at. Some combination of Lout's Expert's Guide and other "lessons
>>>> learned" could be valuable inspiration; as you've previously
>>>> observed, "Text handling is a maze where many have lost their way,"
>>>> so it would be great to at least continue to benefit from how Lout
>>>> advances the field.
>>> That=E2=80=99s probably the way to go even though, like you write, th=
is may be
>>> an endless quest.=C2=A0 :-)
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Ludo=E2=80=99.
>>>  =20
>
>