Hello
On Sun, 26 Jul 2020 11:05:38 +1000
John Gardner wrote:
> >
> > but I guess that's an indication I'm thinking about things in the
> > wrong way.
>
>
> Possibly. What exactly have you been using `.index` for?
>
> By the way, is it a goal of groff to support the Heirloom Troff
> extensio
> > By the way, is it a goal of groff to support the Heirloom Troff extensions?
>
> Nope, more like the other way around. Groff is the dominant Troff
> implementation these days, so it behoves Heirloom Troff to support the more
> commonly-used extensions.
It's not a question of which implementatio
> On Jul 26, 2020, at 8:24 AM, Dave Kemper wrote:
>
> Anyone interested in groff's long-term goals should check out its
> mission statement
> (http://www.gnu.org/software/groff/groff-mission-statement.html),
> crafted after much discussion on this list several years ago. Three
> core improvement
On 7/26/20, Richard Morse wrote:
> Which is the external helper that lets it natively understand modern fonts?
> That would be huge!
Yeah, it's confusingly part of the mom macro package documentation,
even though it's a general-purpose groff script. See
http://www.schaffter.ca/mom/mom-06.html#in
On 2020-07-26 Dave Kemper wrote:
> It doesn't so much let groff natively understand modern fonts as
> convert those fonts into a form groff does understand (Type 1
> PostScript) and install them in a place groff checks automatically.
> By default this requires root privs, though if you don't have
>
> That groff cannot do the first at all, and requires external helpers
> (one of them not even shipped with the package) for the latter two,
> ironically makes it look more outdated than its "heirloom" counterpart.
What I find laughable as that neither of them support right-to-left
languages, w
hello,
as a newcomer user but involved to other open source projects, i'm
hooked by this:
> software to have. Neatroff comes to the rescue on that front, so... we're
> basically looking at unifying *three* major implementations. ;-)
i guess the number of contributors of all those projects is not
Hi Marc,
>> software to have. Neatroff comes to the rescue on that front, so...
>> we're basically looking at unifying *three* major implementations. ;-)
> i guess the number of contributors of all those projects is not that
> big so i wonder if someone thought about a join effort on one
> implem
On 7/26/20, John Gardner wrote:
> What I find laughable as that neither of them support right-to-left
> languages,
Good point. I wonder why this never came up during the
mission-statement discussion; it seems like another major expansion
that ought to be a long-term goal.
hello Ingo,
thanks for this detailed anwser.
> The reason i'm sticking to groff is that groff has been the typesetter
> predominantly used by BSD systems during the last 25 years, that
i think everyone else have good reasons to be stuck on its own prefered
implementation.
> I think it's a gener
Hi Branden,
On Sat, Jul 25 2020 at 04:27:54 PM, "G. Branden Robinson"
wrote:
> At 2020-07-25T07:10:11+0200, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
>> > Sorry for the somewhat loud subject line, but we don't often see
>> > Werner or Bertrand on this list anymore and to my recollection, I've
>> > never seen Vaibha
11 matches
Mail list logo
