> Also, if Werner wants I can smuggle in deletion of the remaining sed
> comment. ;-)
I suggest to wait for bug reports instead – if such reports ever will
come :-)
Werner
Hi all,
(changing the title, was: It is time to modernise "groff")
On Wed, Nov 08 2017 at 06:39:03 PM, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
> Gour wrote on Wed, Nov 08, 2017 at 05:57:00PM +0100:
>
>> Here I'd like to ask what has happened in the meantime in regard to
>> the groff's features and plans stated in
On Wed, Nov 08, 2017, Gour wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Sep 2017 19:02:48 -0400
> Peter Schaffter wrote:
>
> Hello Peter,
>
> I have visited your site and I'm thrilled with the beauty of your documents
> produced with groff/mom and must admit that mom is the primary reason I'm
> looking whether groff/mom
On Wed, Nov 08, 2017, Gour wrote:
> Let me say that the reason to loook (again) at groff was the fact that Pandoc
> got support for creating groff output as stated in its release notes:
>
> "New output format ms (groff ms). Complete support, including tables, math,
> syntax highlighting, and PDF b
Forgot to mention:
At 2017-11-08T13:17:05-0500, G. Branden Robinson wrote:
> Replace `text' in roff input with \[lq]text\[rq].
[...]
> contrib/mm/groff_mmse.7.man | 2 +-
According to the inerrant repository of all human knowledge[1], Swedes
and Finns ”quote like this”, so
Hi,
Gour wrote on Wed, Nov 08, 2017 at 05:57:00PM +0100:
> Here I'd like to ask what has happened in the meantime in regard to
> the groff's features and plans stated in the mission statement like
> Knuth-Plass algorithmy for paragraph-based linebreaks, native support
> for TrueType, Open Type, a
On Sat, 2 Sep 2017 13:33:45 -0500
Blake McBride wrote:
> First, I love troff. In my 35+ years in the software industry, I've
> never seen a better balance between simplicity, effectiveness, and
> power with respect to producing fine documents.
Today when browsing archives of this list I fou
On Sat, 2 Sep 2017 18:02:39 -0400
Peter Schaffter wrote:
> When we were drafting a mission statement for groff in 2014, we all
> agreed that backward compatibility would remain a top priority.
> Troff's very long history stands as a functioning proof-of-concept
> that continued backward compatibi
On Wed, 27 Sep 2017 19:02:48 -0400
Peter Schaffter wrote:
Hello Peter,
I have visited your site and I'm thrilled with the beauty of your documents
produced with groff/mom and must admit that mom is the primary reason I'm
looking whether groff/mom can eliminate my need to depend on LyX/LaTeX or
p
At 2017-11-08T16:16:55+0100, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
> Even if you want to keep stripping mdoc for some reason, you should
> probably just stop stripping the doc- prefix. I don't think setting
> up dedicated machinery just for mdoc is worth the complexity.
I support this. It's the only substitution
Hi,
Peter Schaffter wrote on Tue, Nov 07, 2017 at 03:26:59PM -0500:
> On Tue, Nov 07, 2017, G. Branden Robinson wrote:
>> I've been inspecting the operation of tmac/strip.sed, and
>>
>> I noticed that the following substitution:
>>
>> s/\([^/]\)doc-/\1/g
>>
>> has an impact outside what I pr
> (It seems one list adds [Groff] and the commit list adds [groff] and so
> Mailman doesn't uniq them.)
Should be fixed now, using `[groff]' everywhere.
Werner
>> BTW, doesn't
>> http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/groff.git/tree/tmac/strip.sed still
>> have a `#' comment from before Brandon's change? tmac/fixmacros.sed
>> also has one.
>
> That's true:
>
> 222812ab4 (Werner LEMBERG 2006-06-06 16:49:39 + 4) # strip comment
That probably predat
I wrote:
> I'm talking specifically about the source of the word "groff", not all
> the uses of the word roff that litter. CSTR 54 doesn't mention `roff'
> IIRC, e.g. to refer to the language. GNU groff wasn't an FSF
> implementation of roff, but troff, etc. Perhaps it's Bernd coinage.
https://
Hi Branden,
> > Or don't add the dependency that needs maintaining?
>
> Huh. I'd make the "doesn't need maintaining" argument to support what
> I already have, not your revision.
It does need maintaining, despite all the disclaimers in advance to it
being out of date, because there's little poin
At 2017-11-08T11:37:37+, Ralph Corderoy wrote:
> Hi Werner,
>
> > What about putting this information into a tmac.sed.README or
> > something similar?
>
> I'm not sure how useful the information was? And how much it might
> mislead if it's read instead of the sed. :-)
If my explanation was
At 2017-11-08T11:52:37+, Ralph Corderoy wrote:
> Hi Branden,
>
> Generally, try and use few words whilst preserving meaning and avoiding
> ambiguity. Folks have to wade through this when they're looking for an
> answer to their question. :-)
Brevity is the soul of...something or other. ;-)
Hi Branden,
Generally, try and use few words whilst preserving meaning and avoiding
ambiguity. Folks have to wade through this when they're looking for an
answer to their question. :-)
> +In the
> +.I groff
> +source distribution, some of the macro packages (corresponding to
> +.BR groff_hdtbl
Hi Werner,
> What about putting this information into a tmac.sed.README or
> something similar?
I'm not sure how useful the information was? And how much it might
mislead if it's read instead of the sed. :-)
BTW, doesn't
http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/groff.git/tree/tmac/strip.sed still
have
Hi jkl,
> > ret = (char *)calloc(strlen(charset) + 1, 1);
> > strcpy(ret, charset);
>
> As a logical matter, the calloc call should have the count as the first
> argument:
>
> ret = (char *)calloc(1, strlen(charset) + 1);
True, or just malloc(), as I think I pointed out, since al
20 matches
Mail list logo
