Re: [groff] Upgrade to 1.22.4 breaks PDF font

2019-02-19 Thread Bertrand Garrigues
Hi Richard, On Tue, Feb 19 2019 at 10:58:17 PM, Colin Watson wrote: > On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 05:00:43PM +, Richard Morse wrote: >> Hi! I just upgraded to groff 1.22.4, and suddenly my files are not >> turning into PDFs properly. The error is "can't find font NR" (and >> "NI"). This is on Mac

Re: [groff] Upgrade to 1.22.4 breaks PDF font

2019-02-19 Thread Colin Watson
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 05:00:43PM +, Richard Morse wrote: > Hi! I just upgraded to groff 1.22.4, and suddenly my files are not > turning into PDFs properly. The error is "can't find font NR" (and > "NI"). This is on Mac OS X 10.13, with the groff installed by > Homebrew. > > Looking at /usr/l

Re: [groff] [patch] modernize -T ascii rendering of opening single quote

2019-02-19 Thread Doug McIlroy
> people aren't aware that their manpage formatter is > catering to a particular font style that is no longer in > common use. They just see that man(1) outputs "weird quotes." As man pages are now, one will see weird quotes regardless of how \(oq is rendered. I checked /usr/share/man1/[a-c]* in

[groff] Upgrade to 1.22.4 breaks PDF font

2019-02-19 Thread Richard Morse
Hi! I just upgraded to groff 1.22.4, and suddenly my files are not turning into PDFs properly. The error is "can't find font NR" (and "NI"). This is on Mac OS X 10.13, with the groff installed by Homebrew. Looking at /usr/local/share/groff/1.22.4/font/devpdf, especially when comparing it with d

Re: [groff] [patch] modernize -T ascii rendering of opening single quote

2019-02-19 Thread John Gardner
*> It's if they choose, or are coerced, into a LC_CTYPE=C locale causing -Tascii that they see asymmetric `'.* Uhm. Is this issue more of a "would like to have" instead of something objectively problematic? For a start, I see ``this'' in project readmes and plain-text docs all the time, and E

Re: [groff] [patch] modernize -T ascii rendering of opening single quote

2019-02-19 Thread Ralph Corderoy
Hi Jeff, > > Thus one that makes 60 and 27 look like a left/right pair of single > > quotes, and also grave and acute accents for over-striking. > > This is yet a third possibility, which the editor of the 1967 standard > said was also true of the earlier version. They gave possibilities, > but i