Date: Fri, 24 Sep 1999 09:54:51 +0400 From: Alexey Zelkin <phantom@cris.net> To: "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> Cc: committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/contrib/groff/nroff nroff.sh Message-ID: <19990924095451.A28781@scorpion.crimea.ua> In-Reply-To: <199909232055.NAA00345@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> References: <19990923200051.A20174@scorpion.crimea.ua> <199909232055.NAA00345@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
hi, On Thu, Sep 23, 1999 at 01:55:19PM -0700, Rodney W. Grimes wrote: > > > > phantom 1999/09/23 06:40:29 PDT > > > > > > > > Modified files: > > > > contrib/groff/nroff nroff.sh > > > > Log: > > > > Learn nroff about -p and -t options. It allows to preprocess > > > > file with pic(1) and tbl(1). > > > > > Though I agree with the idea, I'm not sure how practical it is > > > to expect nroff to be able to actually display pic(1) output :-) > > Hmmm... Reason for addition these option is my practic way -- I have few > > files which require preprocessing with pic or tbl. It's better for me > > to enter "nroff -p -ms xx.ms | less" than > > "groff -S -mtty-char -Tascii -p -ms xx.ms | less" > > So it was done simply as a short cut for you??? If so then I have Hmm... If I see that FreeBSD distribution has files which require pic(1), tbl(1) or eqn(1) preprocess to see correct output, then I think that such feature is useful. Am I wrong ? Simple example is manpage for doscmd(1). Take a look on this page with nroff and man (which by default use tbl(1)). > doubts about it beeing a commit canidate. If it does not emit the > proper white space areas for the pic and tbl it's a bug. I don't > like new bugs. As I noted in my commit message "It allows to preporcess with ...". I not implemented new logic nroff, I just reused troff's logic, I just allowed to users make their life simpler. Can you describe to my why this feature is a bug ? And why same feature in groff and troff not a bug ? > > > Any reason not to add eqn support?? > > Do you need this option ? I remember that nroff ignores -e option. > > Not if it don't do the right thing and at least create the correct > amount of white space where the graphic eqn output would go. Please take a look on noted above doscmd(1) with nroff, section DISK TYPES... And when with man(1)... Now you see difference between not-preprocessed and preprocessed *roff files. As I understand same applies to eqn and pic. > > > Oh, and I hope this was sent back to the gnu maintaners, or it will be > > > yet another FreeBSD incompatibility :-(. > > Don't worry about groff package. Groff lost mainainer at middle of > > 1996 and still waits. > > You mean to tell me that the GNU project has no one tracking submissions > of changes to groff? That seems really odd... When James Clarck (groff maninainer) gone groff package was updates only once. And this update included documentation for pic and few updates (README, INSTALL etc.). For more information -- src/contrib/groff/ChangeLog. -- /* Alexey Zelkin && phantom@cris.net */ /* Tavric National University && phantom@crimea.edu */ /* http://www.ccssu.crimea.ua/~phantom && phantom@FreeBSD.org */ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990924095451.A28781>