Date: Sat, 06 Feb 1999 12:22:20 +0900 From: Kazutaka YOKOTA <yokota@zodiac.mech.utsunomiya-u.ac.jp> To: Bill Fenner <fenner@parc.xerox.com> Cc: Wolfram Schneider <wosch@cs.tu-berlin.de>, bugs@FreeBSD.ORG, yokota@zodiac.mech.utsunomiya-u.ac.jp Subject: Re: [yokota@zodiac.mech.utsunomiya-u.ac.jp: .Fx and .Os macros in groff, FreeBSD] Message-ID: <199902060322.MAA01583@zodiac.mech.utsunomiya-u.ac.jp> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 05 Feb 1999 10:48:06 PST." <199902051848.KAA10802@mango.parc.xerox.com> References: <199902051848.KAA10802@mango.parc.xerox.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>Is it too stupid to wonder why these macros aren't simply, say, [...] >Plus, the extra \\*(aa is just clutter; the font and size have >already been reset by the first \\*(aa. Also, positional parameters >are replaced with empty strings if they don't exist (at least in >our groff), so the macro could be further reduced to: > >.de Fx >.nr cF \\n(.f >.nr cZ \\n(.s >.ds aa \&\f\\n(cF\s\\n(cZ >\&\\*(tNFreeBSD\\*(aa \\$1\\$2 >.. Your version of the Fx macro works here. (Except that the old version prints "FreeBSD 2.0" for ".Fx 2", whereas your version prints "FreeBSD 2". I thinks this is minor and benign, and we can just ignore this difference.) Then, how should Os macro, in doc-common, be fixed? I am no nroff/groff expert. Does the following snippet look OK? .de Os .ds oS Null <some other defs> .if "\\$1"FreeBSD" \{\ . .ds oS FreeBSD \\$2 .\} <some other defs> .. We should fix these macros in time for 3.1-RELEASE. Would you do it, or shall I? Kazu yokota@FreeBSD.ORG To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-bugs" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199902060322.MAA01583>