[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Using tbl(1) for structure definitions
From: |
Alejandro Colomar |
Subject: |
Re: Using tbl(1) for structure definitions |
Date: |
Sat, 30 Jul 2022 02:04:39 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.0.2 |
Hi Branden,
On 7/30/22 01:56, G. Branden Robinson wrote:
Hi Alex,
At 2022-07-30T00:38:13+0200, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
On 7/29/22 23:08, G. Branden Robinson wrote:
At 2022-07-29T17:26:10+0200, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
Hmm, considering that the amount of multiline comments with 80-char
terminals is still non-negligible (not in this page, but in all type
pages), I think I prefer to consistently support them, even when I
don't need. That will have 2 side effects: contributors will
experience a more consistent syntax; and I will support smaller
terminals with extra-attractive comments.
Okay. If you trust your contributors to understand that column just for
the comment leader, then I trust you. :)
Heh! I'll try.
I'll send a v5 with another page, to show that tabs are not good
enough. And I'll try to not forget CCing groff@.
It'll be good to have a look.
Oh, it's already in your mailbox, isn't it?
I'm really looking forward to killing off another application of
`PD`.
Ok. T think I'll remove .PD, and leave the extra blank line until
.TS is fixed. A blank line will not hurt too much.
The fix should be in my next push; I merely got caught in a yak
shave called groff_mm(7).
Nice. Still, I woudn't make use of it so fast, if the side effect in
old groff(1) versions was something more than a blank line.
It wasn't. I was confusing this issue with Savannah #49390.
https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/index.php?49390
Savannah #43637 is also pretty gross.
https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/index.php?43637
I rendered all the groff man pages from Git HEAD with groff 1.22.4, with
the `sp` request deleted from the `TS` definition and a fallback
definition of `MR` (just like the one I presented in arguments with
Ingo) in man.local, and observed no pertinent layout problems.
But reallistically, how many people will fix their TS in man.local? Are
we asking Debian [old]stable to backport that fix? :)
Poor contributors are unlikely to have latest groff for git HEAD :)
Don't I know it.
Regards,
Branden
Cheers,
Alex
--
Alejandro Colomar
<http://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
- Re: Using tbl(1) for structure definitions, (continued)
- Re: Using tbl(1) for structure definitions, G. Branden Robinson, 2022/07/26
- Re: Using tbl(1) for structure definitions, Alejandro Colomar (man-pages), 2022/07/27
- Re: Using tbl(1) for structure definitions, Ralph Corderoy, 2022/07/27
- Re: Using tbl(1) for structure definitions, G. Branden Robinson, 2022/07/29
- Re: Using tbl(1) for structure definitions, Alejandro Colomar, 2022/07/29
- Re: Using tbl(1) for structure definitions, G. Branden Robinson, 2022/07/29
- Re: Using tbl(1) for structure definitions, Alejandro Colomar, 2022/07/29
- Re: Using tbl(1) for structure definitions, G. Branden Robinson, 2022/07/29
- Re: Using tbl(1) for structure definitions,
Alejandro Colomar <=
- Re: Using tbl(1) for structure definitions, G. Branden Robinson, 2022/07/29
Re: Using tbl(1) for structure definitions, Heinz-Jürgen Oertel, 2022/07/29