Larry I guess I should confess my ulterior motive: the addition of
a generalized set of macros to support the integration of perl into
groff.
As a background-- I recently used the whole toolchain on a recent project.
That includes Refer and pdfmark. I also attempted to produce both pdf and
html
On 19/02/10 06:04:13, Larry Kollar wrote:
> In my Makefile, I use 2> to redirect stderr to a file:
>
> groff $(FLAGS) -rTocGen=1 -z stuff bookfile.ms 2>bookfile.aux
> ## do stuff with the aux file ##
> groff $(FLAGS) stuff bookfile.ms >bookfile.ps 2>bookfile.err
>
> The TocGen r
Tom Borawski wrote:
I was wondering if their is any possibility having .tm write
to anything other than STDOUT ? It would make managing forward
references (when used with 2 groff passes) much easier.
In my Makefile, I use 2> to redirect stderr to a file:
groff $(FLAGS) -rTocGen=1 -z
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 08:38:17PM -0500, Tom Borawski wrote:
> :
> Thanks to all the Groff developers. You have no idea of how useful
> you have turned what is possibly the oldest continuously used software
> package.
Amen.
As a continuous user of n/t/groff since 1974 I also am most appreci
Ted-- I have developed some bad "Bell Labs" habits since starting with
groff many years ago. The source of my bad habits are the original
Bell Labs documentations. The GNU extensions turn groff into an extremely
powerful tool.
the .tm macro is legacy Bell. These new macros really simplify thing
Werner-- you are fantastic ! I hope someday I'll have the time
to pay back to the groff community what it has given to me.
On Tue, 16 Feb 2010, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
I was wondering if their is any possibility having .tm write to
anything other than STDOUT? It would make managing forward
> I was wondering if their is any possibility having .tm write to
> anything other than STDOUT? It would make managing forward
> references (when used with 2 groff passes) much easier.
Use .open/.opena, .write/.writec, and .close
Werner
On 16-Feb-10 09:34:58, Tadziu Hoffmann wrote:
>
>> I was wondering if their is any possibility having .tm write
>> to anything other than STDOUT ? It would make managing forward
>> references (when used with 2 groff passes) much easier.
>
> Instead of .tm you should use ".write ",
> which does e
> I was wondering if their is any possibility having .tm write
> to anything other than STDOUT ? It would make managing forward
> references (when used with 2 groff passes) much easier.
Instead of .tm you should use ".write ",
which does exactly what you want. (A stream is like a
filehandle, us
Apologies for the following! I experienced a brief power failure
while composing a reply to Tom's query below, and (since emails
which are being edited for sending are stored in my outbox) when I
re-booted the stub of the reply (below) was automatically sent.
I will start again shortly (I have to
On 16-Feb-10 00:29:44, Tom Borawski wrote:
> I was wondering if their is any possibility having .tm write
> to anything other than STDOUT ? It would make managing forward
> references (when used with 2 groff passes) much easier.
>
> In other words for a forward reference (now I have to)
>
> .so
I was wondering if their is any possibility having .tm write
to anything other than STDOUT ? It would make managing forward
references (when used with 2 groff passes) much easier.
In other words for a forward reference (now I have to)
.so hand-edited-STDOUT-captured-text-with-reference.txt
{res
12 matches
Mail list logo
