[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Groff] bug in GNU troff?
From: |
Werner LEMBERG |
Subject: |
Re: [Groff] bug in GNU troff? |
Date: |
Sun, 21 Jan 2001 15:55:40 +0100 (CET) |
[about tabs and partial lines]
> That doesn't matter. groff was meant to be "a complete, open
> source implementation of the standard Unix typesetting system" -- James
> Clark.
In compatibility mode, yes. But, sorry if I say so, this particular
behaviour of UNIX troff is (at least for me) neither intuitive nor
very useful -- I'm really interested to see a practical application.
> There's a danger of trying to coerce groff to what you think troff
> should have been.
Which danger? Please elaborate. Since the very moment of introducing
long names, groff is no longer compatible with UNIX troff.
I don't want to be a guard of a museum.
Werner
- [Groff] bug in GNU troff?, Werner LEMBERG, 2001/01/18
- Re: [Groff] bug in GNU troff?, Larry Jones, 2001/01/19
- Re: [Groff] bug in GNU troff?, Ralph Corderoy, 2001/01/20
- Re: [Groff] bug in GNU troff?, Werner LEMBERG, 2001/01/20
- Re: [Groff] bug in GNU troff?, Ralph Corderoy, 2001/01/20
- Re: [Groff] bug in GNU troff?,
Werner LEMBERG <=
- Re: [Groff] bug in GNU troff?, Ralph Corderoy, 2001/01/21
- Re: [Groff] bug in GNU troff?, Jon Snader, 2001/01/22
- Re: [Groff] bug in GNU troff?, Werner LEMBERG, 2001/01/22
- Re: [Groff] bug in GNU troff?, Ralph Corderoy, 2001/01/22