On Tue, Oct 04, 2022 at 07:30:58AM -0500, G. Branden Robinson wrote: > At 2022-10-04T11:55:41+0100, Colin Watson wrote: > > This is because the preprocessor line at the top of the page is: > > > > '\" et > > Ah, you're trusting man page authors. A dangerous practice... ;-) > > > man(1) deals with these in the order given. > > Nothing I've learned about the troff ecosystem suggests to me that this > is a good approach.
Yeah, just to be clear, I'm not saying this is desirable, just how it currently is. To tell you the truth I hadn't previously looked at that aspect of the code in detail. I'm sure I can fix it - just wanted to check on the best approach. > > Should I have man(1) rearrange things into a canonical order? > > You could, but I am wondering why you manage the pipeline yourself > instead of handing off to groff(1) (with appropriate options) when it is > the formatter. For consistency when the formatter isn't groff? Exactly that, I think. It's simpler to have the same code paths involved either way. > > If so, I guess I should rearrange everything rather than just tbl(1) > > and eqn(1), to match what groff(1) does? > > There is the problem that you support vgrind, and groff doesn't know > anything about that program. I've never even used it myself so I don't > know where in the sequence it should go. I think I may have added it in a fit of youthful enthusiasm rather than out of practical need, but it's there now. I expect I can figure something out. Thanks, -- Colin Watson (he/him) [cjwat...@debian.org]
