On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 11:30 AM Debian Bug Tracking System <ow...@bugs.debian.org> wrote: > > If I remember correctly (I raised this bug over 6 years ago: > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=750202) it is not > > GROFF_NO_SGR. It is GROFF_SGR. > > I think you must be mistaken; there is no match for GROFF_SGR in the > current groff source tree, nor in its entire Git history (with patches > showing).
I am not mistaken. I'm not sure if you really understand what the problem was. https://metadata.ftp-master.debian.org/changelogs//main/g/groff/groff_1.22.4-3_changelog * Disable the new ANSI colour/bold/underline escapes in nroff mode, because most pagers either fail to cope with it or need special options to do so. It can be re-enabled by editing /etc/groff/man.local and /etc/groff/mdoc.local, or by setting the environment variable GROFF_SGR to something non-empty. Does that say GROFF_SGR, or does it say GROFF_NO_SGR? I don't know how to look at the Git history for the Debian groff packages (if there is one) but the file is /etc/groff/mdoc.local which is provided by the package groff-base. > > > Is it important that overstrike sequences be used by default for bold > > or underlined text? I know that "less" recognizes these, but I > > couldn't tell you what else does. > > In my experience, less stuff (maybe I should say "fewer stuff"...) Stuff is a mass noun so no plural. > recognizes these overstriking semantics than recognizes SGR escapes. > But some people, like Thomas Dickey and Ingo Schwarze, violently oppose > SGR escapes in nroff output. They are probably not actually violent about it, though ;-) I don't know much about groff but one way forward might be to enable it in more cases. For example when I run "man bc" there are several programs run, one of which will be nroff. If all of the programs involved understand the ECMA-48 "SGR" codes then there would be no harm in switching to SGR codes in this case. (In case you were wondering, it stands for "Select Graphic Rendition".)
