inal Osannah
Troff's source code; even vi(1) considers form feeds to be section markers
(for the purposes of its { and } commands).
Most printers today still recognise form feeds as page-breaks when printing
plain-text output.
Cheers,
— John
On Mon, 15 Feb 2021, 4:30 pm G. Branden Robinson, <
g.br
of text)
>- ^C ETX (End of text)
>- ^E ENQ (Enquiry)
>- ^F ACK (Acknowledge)
>- ^G BEL (Alarm / bell)
>- ^? DEL (Delete)
>
> Groff also accepts ^D (End of transmission) and form feeds, although
> the latter might be unintentional.
As I understand it, there
- ^B STX (Start of text)
- ^C ETX (End of text)
- ^E ENQ (Enquiry)
- ^F ACK (Acknowledge)
- ^G BEL (Alarm / bell)
- ^? DEL (Delete)
Groff also accepts ^D (End of transmission) and form feeds, although the
latter might be unintentional. For full details on compatibility, see
What is the purpose of this? ^G , control character.
I see it a lot used in the hdtbl macro set.
Kind regards
Wim Stockman
Steffen Nurpmeso wrote in <20190704202830.ds7rz%stef...@sdaoden.eu>:
|James K. Lowden wrote in <20190703140438.a516b5af83532af9d7aa883b@schema\
|mania.org>:
||On Wed, 3 Jul 2019 07:08:44 +1000
||John Gardner wrote:
||
||> Really? That's interesting. What did do? On the terminal
...
||^Q/^
> On Jul 2, 2019, at 8:20 PM, John Gardner wrote:
>
>> *There were 24 lines per page unless over-ridden on the command line.*
>> *The tool was real unix tool, lean and mean with only a few arguments.*
>> *It was far less functional than either 'more' or 'less' but it did**let
>> you page throu
James K. Lowden wrote in <20190703140438.a516b5af83532af9d7aa883b@schema\
mania.org>:
|On Wed, 3 Jul 2019 07:08:44 +1000
|John Gardner wrote:
|
|> Really? That's interesting. What did do? On the terminal
|> emulators I have on hand at the moment, none of them are responding
|> or behaving d
On Wed, 3 Jul 2019 10:25:23 +1000 (AEST)
Damian McGuckin wrote:
> Back in those days, terminals ran at 30-240 characters per second.
> Not all that fast. Actually 300 characters per second, i.e. 300 baud,
> was slowww! I remember being blown away by 9600 baud terminals.
Right. If you hooked up
On Wed, 3 Jul 2019 07:08:44 +1000
John Gardner wrote:
> Really? That's interesting. What did do? On the terminal
> emulators I have on hand at the moment, none of them are responding
> or behaving differently.
Same thing it still does do, because outside of the GUI all we do is
emulate 1970s ha
On Wed, Jul 03, 2019 at 11:39:32AM +1000, John Gardner wrote:
> I've lost the link, but I remember somebody got hold of a hard-copy
> terminal somehow and used it to display his Twitter's newsfeed by threading
> output through a serial port hooked up to his Linux workstation.
>
> The output wasn't
On Wed, 3 Jul 2019, John Gardner wrote:
I've lost the link, but I remember somebody got hold of a hard-copy terminal
somehow and used it to display his Twitter's newsfeed by threading output
through a serial port hooked up to his Linux workstation.
The output wasn't much to look at, but the effo
I've lost the link, but I remember somebody got hold of a hard-copy
terminal somehow and used it to display his Twitter's newsfeed by threading
output through a serial port hooked up to his Linux workstation.
The output wasn't much to look at, but the effort somebody went to to
connect two technol
On Wed, 3 Jul 2019, John Gardner wrote:
Surely 300 baud was a more refreshing[1] experience than an
electromechanical teletypewriter, right?
Never used one. I am NOT that old! Although I saw maybe 2 in my life.
Regards - Damian
Pacific Engineering Systems International, 277-279 Broadway, Gle
>
>
> *Particularly irritating was emacs's use of for*
> *"search" because it conflicted with this flow-control, meaning*
> *that you had to either reconfigure your tty settings or the**emacs
> keybindings.*
I still remember my first experience with Emacs:
1. Open file, edit buffer
2. Undo a mi
On Wed, 3 Jul 2019, John Gardner wrote:
There were 24 lines per page unless over-ridden on the command
line.
The tool was real unix tool, lean and mean with only a few
arguments.
It was far less functional than either 'more' or 'less' but it
did
let you
>
>
> *There were 24 lines per page unless over-ridden on the command line.*
> *The tool was real unix tool, lean and mean with only a few arguments.*
> *It was far less functional than either 'more' or 'less' but it did**let
> you page through a file or STDIN nicely*
Yep, that's the sort of page
On Wed, 3 Jul 2019, John Gardner wrote:
*Some terminals, the Tek 401x series especially, could* *be configured
to tell the host to stop sending text on* *a "page full" condition.
Some sent the proper RS-232**hardware signals, some sent
/.*
Really? That's interesting. What did do? On the ter
> > Some terminals, the Tek 401x series especially, could
> > be configured to tell the host to stop sending text on
> > a "page full" condition. Some sent the proper RS-232
> > hardware signals, some sent /.
> Really? That's interesting. What did do? On the
> terminal emulators I have on hand
>
>
> *Some terminals, the Tek 401x series especially, could*
> *be configured to tell the host to stop sending text on*
> *a "page full" condition. Some sent the proper RS-232**hardware signals,
> some sent /.*
Really? That's interesting. What did do? On the terminal emulators
I have on hand a
On Tue, Jul 2, 2019 at 7:51 AM John Gardner wrote:
> BTW, stupid question: how did people in the 70s read
> lengthy files without a pager...? When I ran Unix 7 on
> SIMH, it lacked both less(1) *and* more(1).
If more (or the equivalent) wasn't available, being
adroit with the and keys was the
thy files without
a pager...? When I ran Unix 7 on SIMH, it lacked both less(1) *and* more(1).
On Tue, 2 Jul 2019 at 22:53, G. Branden Robinson <
g.branden.robin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> At 2019-07-01T18:44:47+0200, Tadziu Hoffmann wrote:
> > > Now, conversely, the backspac
At 2019-07-01T18:44:47+0200, Tadziu Hoffmann wrote:
> > Now, conversely, the backspacing semantic model supports arbitrary
> > character composition, which glass TTYs and their emulators never
> > do. (Almost never? I'd love to hear of any exceptions.)
>
> Tektronix (storage scope) terminals all
> Now, conversely, the backspacing semantic model supports arbitrary
> character composition, which glass TTYs and their emulators never do.
> (Almost never? I'd love to hear of any exceptions.)
Tektronix (storage scope) terminals allowed arbitrary overprinting.
The Tek emulation in xterm stil
At 2019-06-30T18:43:31+0200, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
> Sure, paper teletypes is what backspace encoding historically comes
> from. But that doesn't mean its usefulness is restricted to
> paper teletypes. In fact, modern pagers handle it just fine.
Yes, but the simple fact is that groff supports app
Hi Branden,
G. Branden Robinson wrote on Sun, Jun 30, 2019 at 05:11:48AM +1000:
> At 2019-06-29T18:13:57+0200, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
>> On top of the above, i consider that
> [telling pagers to interpret ISO 6429 escape sequences]
>> bad advice. If you think people need to be
At 2019-06-29T18:13:57+0200, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
> On top of the above, i consider that
[telling pagers to interpret ISO 6429 escape sequences]
> bad advice. If you think people need to be told about roff's bad
> habit of defaulting to SGR escapes, then let's recommend groff(1) -c
> rather than l
Hi Branden,
G. Branden Robinson wrote on Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 10:13:40AM -0400:
> commit 4e5439d9827232a1910bda5cac6ccea8d00243f6
> Author: G. Branden Robinson
> Date: Wed Jun 26 20:32:31 2019 +1000
>
> {g,n}roff.1.man: Give assistance to pager users.
>
>
27 matches
Mail list logo
