[bug #66903] Please recommend a date format in groff_man(7)

: None ___ Follow-up Comments: --- Date: Wed 12 Mar 2025 04:38:33 PM UTC By: Alejandro Colomar The groff_man(7) manual page doesn't specify which format should be used for the date. Would you mind recommending ISO 8601? This fo

[bug #66583] [PATCH] allow building groff without makeinfo

Follow-up Comment #53, bug #66583 (group groff): Hi onf, On Sun, Dec 29, 2024 at 08:29:10PM -0500, anonymous wrote: > You can work around that: > > export MAKEFLAGS=-e PREFIX=/bar > make > make install Hmmm. True! (Actually, I'm waiting for the release of make 4.5, since I use MAKEFLA

Re: [bug #66583] [PATCH] allow building groff without makeinfo

Hi onf, On Sun, Dec 29, 2024 at 08:29:10PM -0500, anonymous wrote: > You can work around that: > > export MAKEFLAGS=-e PREFIX=/bar > make > make install Hmmm. True! (Actually, I'm waiting for the release of make 4.5, since I use MAKEFLAGS += --no-builtin-rules MAKEFLAGS += --n

[bug #66583] [PATCH] allow building groff without makeinfo

Follow-up Comment #51, bug #66583 (group groff): Hi onf, On Tue, Dec 31, 2024 at 01:18:50PM -0500, anonymous wrote: > Follow-up Comment #50, bug #66583 (group groff): > > [comment #44 comment #44:] >> On Tue, Dec 31, 2024 at 07:24:03AM -0500, G. Branden Robinson wrote: >>> I trust you realize tha

Re: [bug #66583] [PATCH] allow building groff without makeinfo

Hi onf, On Tue, Dec 31, 2024 at 01:18:50PM -0500, anonymous wrote: > Follow-up Comment #50, bug #66583 (group groff): > > [comment #44 comment #44:] > > On Tue, Dec 31, 2024 at 07:24:03AM -0500, G. Branden Robinson wrote: > >> I trust you realize that you and onf are arguing diametrically opposed

[bug #66583] [PATCH] allow building groff without makeinfo

Follow-up Comment #48, bug #66583 (group groff): Hi Branden, On Tue, Dec 31, 2024 at 11:01:31AM -0500, G. Branden Robinson wrote: > Follow-up Comment #47, bug #66583 (group groff): > > At 2024-12-31T10:27:22-0500, Alejandro Colomar wrote: >> Most likely. I sometimes install

Re: [bug #66583] [PATCH] allow building groff without makeinfo

Hi Branden, On Tue, Dec 31, 2024 at 11:01:31AM -0500, G. Branden Robinson wrote: > Follow-up Comment #47, bug #66583 (group groff): > > At 2024-12-31T10:27:22-0500, Alejandro Colomar wrote: > > Most likely. I sometimes install stuff with --no-install-recommends, > > whic

[bug #66583] [PATCH] allow building groff without makeinfo

Follow-up Comment #46, bug #66583 (group groff): Hi Branden, On Tue, Dec 31, 2024 at 10:04:22AM -0500, G. Branden Robinson wrote: > Follow-up Comment #45, bug #66583 (group groff): > > [just the build failure issue] > > Looks to me like a missing TeX-related dependency. (A missing font, > maybe?

Re: [bug #66583] [PATCH] allow building groff without makeinfo

Hi Branden, On Tue, Dec 31, 2024 at 10:04:22AM -0500, G. Branden Robinson wrote: > Follow-up Comment #45, bug #66583 (group groff): > > [just the build failure issue] > > Looks to me like a missing TeX-related dependency. (A missing font, > maybe?) Most likely. I sometimes install stuff with

Re: [bug #66583] [PATCH] allow building groff without makeinfo

Hi Branden, On Tue, Dec 31, 2024 at 07:24:03AM -0500, G. Branden Robinson wrote: > Follow-up Comment #43, bug #66583 (group groff): > > Hi Alex, > > At 2024-12-30T01:24:39+0100, Alejandro Colomar wrote: > > I don't know that build system [imake], and don't kn

[bug #66583] [PATCH] allow building groff without makeinfo

Follow-up Comment #44, bug #66583 (group groff): Hi Branden, On Tue, Dec 31, 2024 at 07:24:03AM -0500, G. Branden Robinson wrote: > Follow-up Comment #43, bug #66583 (group groff): > > Hi Alex, > > At 2024-12-30T01:24:39+0100, Alejandro Colomar wrote: >> I don't kno

Re: [bug #66583] [PATCH] allow building groff without makeinfo

p in a few days. There, I plan to install Devuan stable again. I'll try to reproduce it there on the clean install. I'll let you know if it reproduces there. > At 2024-12-29T16:14:22+0100, Alejandro Colomar wrote: > > ./configure && make is a horrible thing that can on

[bug #66583] [PATCH] allow building groff without makeinfo

r building groff. I'll receive a new laptop in a few days. There, I plan to install Devuan stable again. I'll try to reproduce it there on the clean install. I'll let you know if it reproduces there. > At 2024-12-29T16:14:22+0100, Alejandro Colomar wrote: >> ./configu

Re: [bug #66583] [PATCH] allow building groff without makeinfo

Hi Branden, On Sun, Dec 29, 2024 at 07:53:34AM -0500, G. Branden Robinson wrote: > > The problem Alex was experiencing, though, occured with a version > > which groff accepted. > > Okay, well, he should be getting CCed on this so maybe he can put us in > the picture. [...] > The repository, and

[bug #66583] [PATCH] allow building groff without makeinfo

Follow-up Comment #14, bug #66583 (group groff): [comment #13 comment #13:] > Alex, does this fix address the problem you reported to the email list in the > "Build error in Devuan stable" thread (linked in comment #4 and comment #5 > here)? Hmmm, I'll test in a few days, when I turn on my laptop

Re: [bug #65451] [PATCH] Remove redundant tests

On Fri, Jul 12, 2024 at 02:36:16PM GMT, G. Branden Robinson wrote: > Update of bug #65451 (group groff): > > Status:None => In Progress > Assigned to:None => gbranden > > > _

[bug #65451] [PATCH] Remove redundant tests

Follow-up Comment #4, bug #65451 (group groff): On Fri, Jul 12, 2024 at 02:36:16PM GMT, G. Branden Robinson wrote: > Update of bug #65451 (group groff): > > Status:None => In Progress > Assigned to:None => gbranden

[bug #65619] Provide a default value for afmtodit(1) -w, when unspecified

: None ___ Follow-up Comments: --- Date: Sun 21 Apr 2024 09:24:09 AM UTC By: Alejandro Colomar As suggested by Branden in <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/groff/2024-04/msg00089.html>, afmtodit(1) could provide a sane

[bug #65585] [gropdf] problems introduced by commit cd9fde325f

Follow-up Comment #6, bug #65585 (group groff): [comment #5 comment #5:] > I am getting this with 'shadow':- > derij@raspberrypi5:~/linuxman/man-pages $ make -B build-book MANDIR=../build/man > make: *** No rule to make target 'build-book'. Stop. > Which used to work before git pull --rebase.

[bug #65585] [gropdf] problems introduced by commit cd9fde325f

Follow-up Comment #4, bug #65585 (group groff): Hi Deri, [comment #2 comment #2:] > Alex is not screaming because the "special sauce" I gave him to create the kernel book does not use the .MR macro at all, even when the particular man page calls .MR! Most of them are using .BR name (n). Once he c

[bug #65474] false positive "warning: unbalanced 'el' request" when processing TZDB zic.8

Follow-up Comment #1, bug #65474 (group groff): Initially reported here: . ___ Reply to this item at:

Re: Use public inbox in groff [was: Remove redundant tests]

Hi Branden, On Sat, Mar 16, 2024 at 08:37:00PM +0100, Andreas Schwab wrote: > Please contact overse...@sourceware.org. Branden, I guess it's you who'd need to ask them to do it. Would you mind doing the honours? Have a lovely night! Alex -- signature.asc

Re: Use public inbox in groff [was: Remove redundant tests]

On Sat, Mar 16, 2024 at 08:37:00PM +0100, Andreas Schwab wrote: > Please contact overse...@sourceware.org. Thanks! Have a lovely night! Alex > -- > Andreas Schwab, sch...@linux-m68k.org > GPG Key fingerprint = 7578 EB47 D4E5 4D69 2510 2552 DF73 E780 A9DA AEC1 > "And now for something completel

Use public inbox in groff [was: Remove redundant tests]

[CC += groff@] Hi Andreas, Dave, [This sub-thread started here: <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-groff/2024-03/msg00054.html>] On Sat, Mar 16, 2024 at 12:11:08PM -0500, Dave Kemper wrote: > On Sat, Mar 16, 2024 at 5:44 AM Alejandro Colomar wrote: > > Where do I need to

[bug #65451] [PATCH] Remove redundant tests

Follow-up Comment #3, bug #65451 (group groff): Patches updated (v5): ___ Reply to this item at:

[bug #65451] [PATCH] Remove redundant tests

Follow-up Comment #2, bug #65451 (group groff): Patches updated and expanded upon (v4): ___ Reply to this item at: ___

Re: [bug #65451] [PATCH] Remove redundant tests

Hi Dave, On Sat, Mar 16, 2024 at 12:29:05AM -0500, Dave Kemper wrote: > On Fri, Mar 15, 2024 at 7:18 PM Alejandro Colomar wrote: > > - Does the mailing list have any way to follow threads without cutting > >them at month boundary? glibc (and other GNU projects, like GCC)

Re: [bug #65451] [PATCH] Remove redundant tests

On Fri, Mar 15, 2024 at 07:57:18PM -0400, Dave wrote: > Update of bug #65451 (group groff): > Follow-up Comment #1: > > Patches updated and expanded upon: > > http://lists.gnu.org/r/groff/2024-03/msg00083.html > http://lists.gnu.org/r/groff/2024-03/msg00085.html > http://lists.gnu.org/r/groff/202

[bug #65452] [indxbib] possibly incomplete bounds check after strtol(3)

Follow-up Comment #3, bug #65452 (group groff): Hi Branden, [comment #2 comment #2:] > commit d7b36a45fc3f49f7db82f5edd33c2a66696115e5 (HEAD -> master, origin/master, origin/HEAD) > Author: G. Branden Robinson > Date: Wed Mar 13 14:50:42 2024 -0500 > > [indxbib]: Mitigate Savannah #65452.

[bug #65320] [pdf] doesn't guard control characters when emitting bookmark diversion

Follow-up Comment #1, bug#65320 (group groff): Tested-by: Alejandro Colomar ``` alx@debian:~/tmp$ groff -man -Tpdf dot.man >dot.pdf alx@debian:~/tmp$ open dot.pdf alx@debian:~/tmp$ groff --version GNU groff version 1.23.0.902-1fce7-dirty Copyright (C) 2023 Free Software Foundation, Inc. T

[bug #64018] [man, mdoc] decide on a common base paragraph indentation

Follow-up Comment #17, bug #64018 (project groff): [comment #15 comment #15:] > I regret that the implementation language makes _groff_ so stinky for people. Having seen the problems it was solving, I can understand why Clark selected it over the just-born ANSI C. It's much closer to application

[bug #64267] Missing blank before SH due to PD 0 IP PD

: None ___ Follow-up Comments: --- Date: Wed 31 May 2023 09:41:32 PM UTC By: Alejandro Colomar I had a typo in a man(7) page where for some reason I slipped an .IP in the wrong place. I had no warnings about that IP. Neither groff(1) nor

Re: [bug #62776] [troff] want "style" warning category for self-deceptive inputs

Hi Bjarni! On 5/2/23 01:21, Alejandro Colomar wrote: > Hi Bjarni, Dave, > > On 5/2/23 01:15, Alejandro Colomar wrote: >> Follow-up Comment #13, bug #62776 (project groff): >> >> >> [comment #12 comment #12:] >>> >>> [comment #10 commen

Re: [bug #62776] [troff] want "style" warning category for self-deceptive inputs

Hi Bjarni, Dave, On 5/2/23 01:15, Alejandro Colomar wrote: > Follow-up Comment #13, bug #62776 (project groff): > > > [comment #12 comment #12:] >> >> [comment #10 comment #10:] >> [...] >> >> N.B. Your text lines are unnecessary long. >> >

[bug #62776] [troff] want "style" warning category for self-deceptive inputs

Follow-up Comment #13, bug #62776 (project groff): [comment #12 comment #12:] > > [comment #10 comment #10:] > [...] > > N.B. Your text lines are unnecessary long. > > When deleting lines from output, (one) "sed -e '//d' [...]" is > simpler than (many) "grep -v ... || : ... I still need th

[bug #62776] [troff] want "style" warning category for self-deceptive inputs

Follow-up Comment #10, bug #62776 (project groff): [comment #9 comment #9:] > comment #8 comment #8:] > > Disabling a warning if you don't care is easy. > > I would love for that to be true of groff warnings. Unfortunately, you can only enable and disable warnings by category, the existing cate

[bug #62776] [troff] want "style" warning category for self-deceptive inputs

Follow-up Comment #8, bug #62776 (project groff): [comment #6 comment #6:] > Also I think the technique you describe, which I have not seen in the wild, might be too clever by half. Better to say in English in a comment, "This macro is intended to cause no breaks.", no? I tend to prefer actual

Re: [bug #52517] adjustment can cause overwritten text on lines using \~

Hi Branden, On 4/14/23 22:08, G. Branden Robinson wrote: > Update of bug #52517 (project groff): > > Status: In Progress => Postponed > > ___ > > Follow-up Comment #3: > > I'm not actively worki

[bug #64018] [man, mdoc] decide on a common base paragraph indentation

Follow-up Comment #6, bug #64018 (project groff): LGTM. Do you have something to test in a branch? ___ Reply to this item at: ___ Message sent via Sava

Re: [bug #63957] [mdoc] Synopsis section should not be adjusted (nor hyphenated)

Hi Branden, On 3/24/23 08:26, G. Branden Robinson wrote: [...] > groff 1.22.4 output: > > > $ groff -mandoc -Tascii ATTIC/timerdday.mdoc | cat -s > mdoc warning: Empty input line #34 > > Name > timerdday -- compute time of launch operation within window > > Synopsis > void timerdday

[bug #63873] \~ can overwrite previous text.

Follow-up Comment #3, bug #63873 (project groff): [comment #2 comment #2:] > See bug #52517 (26th November 2017). Thanks! Seems a duplicate. I have a couple of patches that would fix the bug (I think the first one is better, but I'll propose both, since I may miss some groff obscure stuff):

[bug #63873] \~ can overwrite previous text.

Follow-up Comment #1, bug #63873 (project groff): Smaller reproducer: $ cat space.man .TH space stretchable to-day experiments .SH Bad qwrt\~USHRTrtrtrtrtrtrtrtrtrtrtrtrtrtrtrtrtrtrtrtrtrtrt_MAX .SH Good $ groff -man -Tutf8 -rLL=60n space.man troff:space.man:3: warning [p 1, 0.5i]: cannot break

[bug #63873] \~ can overwrite previous text.

Follow-up Comments: --- Date: Mon 06 Mar 2023 02:26:20 PM UTC By: Alejandro Colomar Reproducible in both 1.22.4 and 1.23.0-HEAD. Reproducer: $ cat interval.man .TH interval notation to-day experiments .SH Description What happens if we use in

[bug #62776] [troff] add optional diagnostic for sentences ending mid-input line

Follow-up Comment #2, bug #62776 (project groff): [comment #0 original submission:] > The question is how to expose it. I'm leaning toward a user-writable register at this point. That would work for me. Just add a small sample demonstrating use in this ticket, and I'll take it. _

[bug #62042] [man]: want designed, documented CHECKSTYLE feature

Follow-up Comment #11, bug #62042 (project groff): Hi Branden, [comment #10 comment #10:] > I am confused. This appears to be working exactly as I intended. Did I misunderstand what you wanted? Yup, check ; it's supposed to cancel the effects of for leading spaces and blank lines, isn't it?

[bug #61954] [man] customizable `PT` and `BT` macros are not flexible enough

Follow-up Comment #6, bug #61954 (project groff): Very nice, it is! Thanks for enabling groff_man(7) as a generic macro package :-) ___ Reply to this item at:

[bug #62042] [man]: want designed, documented CHECKSTYLE feature

Follow-up Comment #9, bug #62042 (project groff): Your snippet is not working for me: $ ll etc/groff/tmac/ total 0 lrwxrwxrwx 1 user user 35 Feb 23 17:30 checkstyle.tmac -> ../../../share/tmac/checkstyle.tmac lrwxrwxrwx 1 user user 31 Feb 4 14:45 deadly.tmac -> ../../../share/tmac/deadly.tmac

[bug #62042] [man]: want designed, documented CHECKSTYLE feature

Follow-up Comment #7, bug #62042 (project groff): But for now, I guessed it's possible to silence a specific warning, by redefining some macro. Isn't it possible? It's not as easy as enabling a switch, but it's already good enough I think. That will allow you to procrastinate even more :)

[bug #62042] groff: CHECKSTYLE: (incorrect) warning about blank lines inside .EX/.EE

Follow-up Comment #5, bug #62042 (project groff): [comment #3 comment #3:] > > [comment #2 comment #2: > > Don't worry about that; I very well know it's "not" a literal mode. You taught me that a long time ago. I haven't checked groff_man_style(7), though, and don't know if it needs to be clea

[bug #62042] groff: CHECKSTYLE: (incorrect) warning about blank lines inside .EX/.EE

Follow-up Comment #2, bug #62042 (project groff): Hi Branden, [comment #1 comment #1:] [...] > All of this said, and _because_ I've had to say it, I feel that the existing groff_man_style(7) page does not make it clear enough that material within .EX/.EE is not in a "literal mode". I intend to m

[bug #61954] [man] customizable `PT` and `BT` macros are not flexible enough

Follow-up Comment #3, bug #61954 (project groff): I don't understand the changes very much. There's still no way to have the first page with a custom title, is it? If there is, please post an example, since I don't yet understand groff enough. ___

[bug #62042] groff: CHECKSTYLE: (incorrect) warning about blank lines inside .EX/.EE

URL: Summary: groff: CHECKSTYLE: (incorrect) warning about blank lines inside .EX/.EE Project: GNU troff Submitted by: alx Submitted on: Sat 12 Feb 2022 06:45:41 PM UTC Category: Gene