Re: [Heirloom] Using the Symbola font in Heirloom troff

> Looking at the postscript output there is a "/uni1F0A1 9429 def" and a > "/uni1F10A" in a "/Encoding-@15@36 [...] def"; is that part of the font > machinery? (I'm sadly ignorant of PostScript, alas.) Kind of. PostScript predates Unicode, sadly, and has limits on how many glyphs can be mapped

Re: [Heirloom] Using the Symbola font in Heirloom troff

Looking at the postscript output there is a "/uni1F0A1 9429 def" and a "/uni1F10A" in a "/Encoding-@15@36 [...] def"; is that part of the font machinery? (I'm sadly ignorant of PostScript, alas.) Looking at troff/troff.d/otf.c

Re: [Heirloom] Using the Symbola font in Heirloom troff

Well, 0x fits in a unsigned short, two bytes. An unsigned int is 4 bytes, and 0x fits in it. I don't think that it is the size of the int that's the problem. On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 12:52 AM John Gardner wrote: > Going from the fact that unimap.c >

Re: [Heirloom] Using the Symbola font in Heirloom troff

Going from the fact that unimap.c uses an int for storing

[bug #58897] ellipses need kerning too

Follow-up Comment #1, bug #58897 (project groff): [comment #0 original submission:] > It would be easy to write a script to patch these files > by duplicating the . kernpairs for the ellipsis. In fact, since I needed it for my own use anyway, I wrote this script (actually just a one-liner I

Re: [Heirloom] Using the Symbola font in Heirloom troff

Thanks for the tip! As it turns out, I am using the OTF. On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 12:24 AM John Gardner wrote: > > The version I got was .ttf, not .otf > > I opened both the original OTF and the > FontLibrary.org > TTF in

Re: [Heirloom] Using the Symbola font in Heirloom troff

> The version I got was .ttf, not .otf I opened both the original OTF and the FontLibrary.org TTF in Glyphs ; the OTF has 12,589 glyphs, whereas the TTF only has 7,956 glyphs. Try the OTF version of

Re: \: re-enables hyphenation--should it?

On 7/31/20, Peter Schaffter wrote: > Surely the most useful and accurate way to describe \& is "a > zero-width, non-printing character." Agreed. A patch that changes the wording to just that is attached. The term in groff(7), "non-printable, zero-width glyph," was already close, but I changed

Re: [Heirloom] Using the Symbola font in Heirloom troff

Hm. Just for my edification, I tried a few things. I’m on a Mac, and I don’t know when I compiled Heirloom troff, but it was a year or two ago, so something things may be different. I downloaded the Symbola font from fontlibrary.org. The version I got was .ttf, not .otf. The various things

Re: [Heirloom] Using the Symbola font in Heirloom troff

In Emacs M-x describe-coding-system tells me the coding system for saving the buffer is utf-8-unix. I don't have any LC_* environment variables set, but LANG=en_US.UTF-8. I'm not very knowledgeable about the insides of Unicode fonts, unfortunately. On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 4:27 PM Richard Morse

Re: Groff vs Heirloom troff (was Re: Quick question: how to do .index in groff?)

On 7/31/20, Steve Izma wrote: > When I adjust the kerning (or mortising, if necessary) > in values of one-hundredth or one-thousandth of a point, Everything I've found online says that mortising is another (less common) term for kerning, but you're using them here as if they're different

Re: Groff vs Heirloom troff (was Re: Quick question: how to do .index in groff?)

On 7/31/20, Peter Schaffter wrote: > Several years ago, I fielded the idea that, instead of chasing after > the Grail of paragraph-at-once, groff's line-formatting algorithm be > improved instead. I worked on systems that used the formatting > strategy I proposed > >

Re: [Heirloom] Using the Symbola font in Heirloom troff

Huh. I’m afraid I’m out of my depth then; you might check and see if your LC_* environment variables are set to something incompatible with utf-8 (or, maybe, check and make sure the file in UTF-8, not UCS-16 or something if you’re on Windows), but hopefully someone with more experience and

Re: [Heirloom] Using the Symbola font in Heirloom troff

And if I add "and explicit unicode character reference \U'1F0A1'" to the file, that character doesn't show up either. On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 2:47 PM Richard Morse wrote: > According to the Heirloom Troff manual, I think that you cannot just > insert Unicode characters (although maybe if your

Re: [Heirloom] Using the Symbola font in Heirloom troff

According to the Heirloom Troff manual, I think that you cannot just insert Unicode characters (although maybe if your LC* environment variables are set correctly, you can?). It says: > Both nroff and troff allow references to specific Unicode characters with the > \U'X' escape sequence; > it

Re: install-font.sh -P needs to allow dots in its argument.

On Sun, Aug 02, 2020, T. Kurt Bond wrote: > The linux version of homebrew installs groff's data directory in > /home/linuxbrew/.linuxbrew/share/groff by default. > > I must have cargo culted the check_optarg without checking everything out > when I added the -P option. I've attached a patch to

[bug #58897] ellipses need kerning too

URL: Summary: ellipses need kerning too Project: GNU troff Submitted by: barx Submitted on: Tue 04 Aug 2020 11:33:02 AM CDT Category: Font devps Severity: 3 - Normal

[Heirloom] Using the Symbola font in Heirloom troff

(The heirloom-doctools README.md says to ask Heirloom doctools questions on this list.) I'd like to use the Symbola font in Heirloom troff. I tried the following: .do xflag 3 .\" fp 5 Optima Optima-Regular ttf .fp 5 Symbola

[bug #58894] remove nonfunctional lines from groff font files

Follow-up Comment #2, bug #58894 (project groff): Makes sense to me. Communicating via comments that groff ignores these lines is important to anyone looking at the files who might otherwise conclude this is a useful thing to do. But the lines don't actually have any effect, so whether they're

[bug #42191] -me macro bug involving word with an umlaut

Follow-up Comment #3, bug #42191 (project groff): Sorry, it's _Werner_. My aging brain has a tendency to hash-collide Werner Lemberg and BSD kernel dude and Unix historian Warner Losh. Both cool guys, but not the same guy. ___ Reply to

[bug #42191] -me macro bug involving word with an umlaut

Update of bug #42191 (project groff): Category: Macro - others => Macro - me Assigned to:None => bgarrigues Planned Release:None => 1.22.4

[bug #42217] -me macro .(b block has incorrect vertical spacing

Update of bug #42217 (project groff): Category:None => Macro - me Item Group:None => Incorrect behaviour ___ Reply to this item at:

[bug #54899] [PATCH] doc/me*.me: clarifications to -me documentation

Update of bug #54899 (project groff): Category: Macro - others => Macro - me ___ Reply to this item at: ___

[bug #43306] -me macro .(c block misaligned

Update of bug #43306 (project groff): Category:None => Macro - me Item Group:None => Incorrect behaviour ___ Reply to this item at:

[bug #54958] doc/meintro_fr.me: add translation of new text in doc/meintro.me

Update of bug #54958 (project groff): Category: Macro - others => Macro - me ___ Reply to this item at: ___

[bug #58894] remove nonfunctional lines from groff font files

Update of bug #58894 (project groff): Status:None => Need Info ___ Follow-up Comment #1: As far as I know, no one actually has any objection to the space-kerning feature. How about we

[bug #58894] remove nonfunctional lines from groff font files

URL: Summary: remove nonfunctional lines from groff font files Project: GNU troff Submitted by: barx Submitted on: Tue 04 Aug 2020 01:11:19 AM CDT Category: Font devps