[bug #47784] doc bug: troff.1 gives misleading definition of "all" for "-w all".

[Kaz Kylheku]

URL:
  <http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?47784>

                 Summary: doc bug: troff.1 gives misleading definition of
"all" for "-w all".
                 Project: GNU troff
            Submitted by: kkylheku
            Submitted on: Mon 25 Apr 2016 11:03:18 AM PDT
                Severity: 3 - Normal
              Item Group: Incorrect behaviour
                  Status: None
                 Privacy: Public
             Assigned to: None
             Open/Closed: Open
         Discussion Lock: Any
         Planned Release: None

    _______________________________________________________

Details:

In the troff man page, the meaning of "all" is clearly described as not, in
fact, inclusive of all warnings, but rather most warnings. This definition is
given in the WARNINGS section, after the table of warnings.

However, there is a forward reference to "all" in the description of the -w
option, where it is stated that "[F]or example, to enable all warnings, use -w
all." This is giving the reader an incorrect implicit definition of what "all"
means.

Someone looking for the warning option might see this first, then then scroll
down to the table of warnings, and then assume that all those warnings are
what "all warnings" refers to.

But, alas, some important errors such as undefined macros are not diagnosed by
-w all, because "all" excludes "mac".

A suggested text might be. "To enable most warnings use -wwall.  Absolutely
all warnings are enabled with -ww."




    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?47784>

_______________________________________________
  Message sent via/by Savannah
  http://savannah.gnu.org/