From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Mar 23 07:38:29 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD8CB1065677 for ; Tue, 23 Mar 2010 07:38:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kamikaze@bsdforen.de) Received: from mail.bsdforen.de (bsdforen.de [212.204.60.79]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A09108FC23 for ; Tue, 23 Mar 2010 07:38:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mobileKamikaze.norad (unknown [109.250.238.63]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.bsdforen.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 385928A190A for ; Tue, 23 Mar 2010 08:38:24 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <4BA86FEE.5020703@bsdforen.de> Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 08:38:22 +0100 From: Dominic Fandrey User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD amd64; en-GB; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100302 Thunderbird/3.0.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org References: <4BA5D7B0.8000507@bsdforen.de> <4BA6C5DA.6040100@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <4BA6C5DA.6040100@FreeBSD.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: nroff -man, .An Aq formatting X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 07:38:29 -0000 On 22/03/2010 02:20, Doug Barton wrote: > On 03/21/10 01:24, Dominic Fandrey wrote: >> It has come to my attention that whereas with LANG=C "nroff -man" >> formats ".An name Aq email" as "name ", it uses different >> characters with LANG=en_GB.UTF-8 "name ⟨email⟩". These characters >> are appropriate, but a lot of unicode fonts don't seem to have them. >> >> Or else my terminal (rxvt-unicode) has trouble displaying them. >> >> Does anybody know a workaround for this? > > AFAIK our standard is -mdoc, not -man. Is there a specific purpose for > which you need -man? And if not does the problem exist with -mdoc? Ah, I didn't know that. Doesn't seem to make a difference, though. Still, I'll test my pages with -mdoc instead of -man in the future. Thanks a lot! -- A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?