Try this:
.\" Minimal footer
.de footer
. sp |\\n[.p]u-.75i
. ce 1
\\n[%]
. if \\n[defer]=1 \c
' bp
..
(You need the no-break version of bp, otherwise the line will
be flushed by the break that occurs before bp is invoked,
and then no partial line will exist during bp processing.
> Folks, I think the aim of all shell scripts in groff is to be POSIX
> `sh' compatible. In case there are bashisms, they should be removed
> and/or circumvented.
I second that! "sh" is the lowest common denominator on nearly all UNIX
operating systems in existence. Therefore one should strive f
Hi Ralph,
> Interesting twenty-minute video covering the history of
> reverse-engineering the $50,000 Linotron 202 typesetter at Bell Labs in
> the late 1970s. http://youtu.be/CVxeuwlvf8w (Hat-tip
> https://twitter.com/rob_pike/status/412398836628217856.)
Funny coincidence that you mentioned th
On Fri, Jan 03, 2014, Werner Lemberg wrote:
>
> > When a diversion that doesn't fit on the last page of a document and
> > has to be deferred to the next (ie a float) is followed by a few
> > lines of type that don't reach the bottom margin, processing stops
> > at the end of the text and the dive
>> #!/bin/sh
>> # This script is written for the bash shell. See bash(1).
>>
>> Or is that just too obvious?
>
> Wouldn't #!/bin/bash be more obvious and less error-prone?
Folks, I think the aim of all shell scripts in groff is to be POSIX
`sh' compatible. In case there are bashisms, they sh
On Fri, Jan 03, 2014, Roger Leigh wrote:
> > #!/bin/sh
> > # This script is written for the bash shell. See bash(1).
> >
> > Or is that just too obvious?
>
> It's incorrect. If you're writing a script for the bash shell, then
> all you need to do is use
>
> #!/bin/bash
>
> and then you'll be
Hi Doug,
> I must be missing something in the discussion about random
> numbers. Why does groff need them? In the offered example
> tmp="$d/eqn2graph$groff_rand"
> the "random number" serves only to make a (supposedly) unique
> name. But of course, if the number is truly random, it is not
> gu
Doug McIlroy wrote:
|I must be missing something in the discussion about random
|numbers. Why does groff need them? In the offered example
|tmp="$d/eqn2graph$groff_rand"
|the "random number" serves only to make a (supposedly) unique
|name. But of course, if the number is truly random, it
I must be missing something in the discussion about random
numbers. Why does groff need them? In the offered example
tmp="$d/eqn2graph$groff_rand"
the "random number" serves only to make a (supposedly) unique
name. But of course, if the number is truly random, it is not
guaranteed to be unique.
On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 09:12:38PM -0500, Peter Schaffter wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 02, 2014, Mike Bianchi wrote:
> > How is someone attempting to understand a #!/bin/sh script to know what
> > the
> > writer intended if there is no documented way to interpret the syntax?
>
> #!/bin/sh
> # This scri
On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 09:12:38PM -0500, Peter Schaffter wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 02, 2014, Mike Bianchi wrote:
> > How is someone attempting to understand a #!/bin/sh script to know what
> > the
> > writer intended if there is no documented way to interpret the syntax?
>
> #!/bin/sh
> # This scri
Werner LEMBERG wrote:
|Regarding the abandoning of ChangeLog files: There is an interesting
|thread right now about this topic in the emacs-devel mailing list.
|Attached you can find one of the messages, and I agree with Eli.
|However, other people might think differently...
I never used Chan
Hi Mike,
> Please define what a non-standard extension shell is.
Something that isn't in POSIX's sh.
> My point is that #!/bin/sh is the name of a shell command that is
> not documented. In fact it does not exist anymore.
There are many shells that aim to provide all of POSIX's sh's behaviou
Hi,
Tethys wrote:
> Since it's not guaranteed to be present, why not just ignore $RANDOM
> and use our own randomly generated integer instead? Something like:
>
> groff_rand=$(dd if=/dev/urandom bs=8 count=1 2>/dev/null | sum | sed
> 's/^0*//;s/ .*//')
> tmp="$d/eqn2graph$groff_rand
Regarding the abandoning of ChangeLog files: There is an interesting
thread right now about this topic in the emacs-devel mailing list.
Attached you can find one of the messages, and I agree with Eli.
However, other people might think differently...
Werner
--- Begin Message ---
> From: Rüdig
15 matches
Mail list logo
