[bug #63808] configure gives incorrect information regarding pdf generation

2023-02-17 Thread G. Branden Robinson
Follow-up Comment #20, bug #63808 (project groff): [comment #19 comment #19:] > > > Standard gropdf > > > > > > This is when only the default foundry is populated with the 35 postscript fonts. This will occur if only ghostscript is available. PDF documentation will be complete. The font test

[bug #63768] want configurable URL format for man page hyperlinks

2023-02-17 Thread G. Branden Robinson
Follow-up Comment #19, bug #63768 (project groff): commit 3fa3ee08503f9509625deae3e9057f8b82f8067c (HEAD -> master, origin/master, origin/HEAD) Author: G. Branden Robinson Date: Sat Feb 18 00:52:58 2023 -0600 [man]: Tweak fix to Savannah #63768. * tmac/an.tmac (MR): Ensure

[bug #63808] configure gives incorrect information regarding pdf generation

2023-02-17 Thread Deri James
Follow-up Comment #19, bug #63808 (project groff): [comment #18 comment #18:] > Hi Deri, > > Thank you very much--I think I may want to put much of this into a text file in the gropdf source directory. > > [comment #17 comment #17:] > > To be clear the major problem occurs when configure is run

[bug #63808] configure gives incorrect information regarding pdf generation

2023-02-17 Thread G. Branden Robinson
Update of bug #63808 (project groff): Status: Need Info => In Progress ___ Follow-up Comment #18: Hi Deri, Thank you very much--I think I may want to put much of this into a text file in the

[bug #63808] configure gives incorrect information regarding pdf generation

2023-02-17 Thread Deri James
Follow-up Comment #17, bug #63808 (project groff): I am glad you have said that, starting to run out of hair! To be clear the major problem occurs when configure is run and it finds the URW fonts but not ghostscript, a minor problem is the check tests. First some definitions:- Standard gropdf

[bug #63768] want configurable URL format for man page hyperlinks

2023-02-17 Thread John Gardner
Follow-up Comment #18, bug #63768 (project groff): [comment #17 comment #17:] > Please review this patch. Works like a charm. However, the inline comments could use some rewording. Here's an amended patch: diff --git a/tmac/an.tmac b/tmac/an.tmac index 917739199..581374789 100644 ---

[bug #63768] want configurable URL format for man page hyperlinks

2023-02-17 Thread G. Branden Robinson
Follow-up Comment #17, bug #63768 (project groff): Hi John, Please review this patch. My solution to validating an*MR-URL-format's existence or nonzero value is simply to unconditionally define `an*url`, and then only override it if the aforementioned register compares to one of the alternative

[bug #63768] want configurable URL format for man page hyperlinks

2023-02-17 Thread John Gardner
Follow-up Comment #16, bug #63768 (project groff): > I think you are, as I'm trying to avoid etching this register's name, or even its existence, in stone. Grouse, now we're on the same page. ;-) > It's just SSH access, to a machine in a build farm somewhere in Europe; I did not imagine that

[bug #63768] want configurable URL format for man page hyperlinks

2023-02-17 Thread G. Branden Robinson
Follow-up Comment #15, bug #63768 (project groff): [comment #14 comment #14:] > [comment #13 comment #13:] > > I wouldn't say "adamant"...but pretty resolved on letting groff > > 1.23.0 gather some feedback on the feature. > > Do you mean feedback on the 'an*MR-URL-format' register? What if you

[bug #63768] want configurable URL format for man page hyperlinks

2023-02-17 Thread John Gardner
Follow-up Comment #14, bug #63768 (project groff): [comment #13 comment #13:] > I wouldn't say "adamant"...but pretty resolved on letting groff > 1.23.0 gather some feedback on the feature. Do you mean feedback on the 'an*MR-URL-format' register? What if you end up having to ditch it? It

[bug #63768] want configurable URL format for man page hyperlinks

2023-02-17 Thread G. Branden Robinson
Follow-up Comment #13, bug #63768 (project groff): [comment #12 comment #12:] > If you're adamant about keeping the current approach, I wouldn't say "adamant"...but pretty resolved on letting groff 1.23.0 gather some feedback on the feature. Keep in mind that 'an*MR-URL-format' is not

[bug #63808] configure gives incorrect information regarding pdf generation

2023-02-17 Thread G. Branden Robinson
Follow-up Comment #16, bug #63808 (project groff): Argh! Ignore that build log! It's the wrong one! Or, rather, I just didn't run my test scenario correctly at all. This invalidates much of my ramblings in the previous 3 comments. Please disregard anything that doesn't make sense and I will

[bug #63808] configure gives incorrect information regarding pdf generation

2023-02-17 Thread G. Branden Robinson
Follow-up Comment #15, bug #63808 (project groff): Sigh. > If the Foundry file makes requests faces the default foundry use the URW fonts, why didn't this work? Let me try to restate this in English. If the Foundry file causes gropdf to resolve requests for faces from the default foundry to