[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[bug #63900] configuration report regarding wrapped macro packages seems
From: |
G. Branden Robinson |
Subject: |
[bug #63900] configuration report regarding wrapped macro packages seems inaccurate |
Date: |
Wed, 9 Aug 2023 15:18:48 -0400 (EDT) |
Update of bug #63900 (project groff):
Status: Ready for Merge => Fixed
Open/Closed: Open => Closed
Planned Release: None => 1.24.0
_______________________________________________________
Follow-up Comment #2:
commit a1b7e240a9abcf96f426a1095ddf18522bb0c164
Author: G. Branden Robinson <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com>
AuthorDate: Mon Mar 13 22:23:02 2023 -0500
Commit: G. Branden Robinson <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com>
CommitDate: Mon Jul 10 03:19:29 2023 -0500
[build]: Clarify GROFF_TMAC Autoconf test output.
* configure.ac: Correct characterization of the list of macro packages
reported. It is not the list of macro packages receiving a "g"
prefix, but the list of macro packages reciving a wrapper macro file
in groff's macro directory, each of which sources the corresponding
system (likely AT&T-descended troff) macro package. Fixes wording I
introduced in commit 4d30dd7424, 31 May.
* m4/groff.m4 (GROFF_TMAC): Clarify first "checking" message: we are
looking for a file name prefix on existing system macro packages (like
"tmac."). This has nothing to do with the prefix applied to groff
commands, or the "g" prefixed to groff implementations of the man, mm,
and ms packages. Tighten wording of second "checking" message.
Consistently say "(none)" instead of "none" or "none found".
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?63900>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/
[Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread] |
- [bug #63900] configuration report regarding wrapped macro packages seems inaccurate,
G. Branden Robinson <=