hello,
> - Update Chapter 3 to cover Vim (including gvim)
please don't!
what's nice about reading UTP is to discover the elegance and simplicity
of it all but as vi user, i was frustrated to see that some things that
are available in implentations like nvi and the openbsd default vi are
not cov
Damian McGuckin wrote on Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 05:56:46PM +1100:
> On Tue, 20 Oct 2020, Larry Kollar wrote:
>> To be honest, I can't believe over a fourth of my life has gone by since
>> we started the transcription.
> The scarier thought is when you realize that you wrote your first tutorial
>
Good morning.
This is my first crack at trying to do something with groff other than
man pages. Running 'make' in the src directory I get:
$ make
/usr/bin/groff -Tpdf -P-pletter -z -step -rpdf:bm.nr=1 -ms -rRef=1 -wall
utp_book.t >/dev/null 2>utp.aux.tmp; \
mv utp.aux.tmp utp.aux; \
/usr/bin/a
On Tuesday, 20 October 2020 13:15:50 BST Nate Bargmann wrote:
> ./front.t: Failed to open
> '/usr/share/ghostscript/9.26/Resource/Font/URWBookman-Demi' make: ***
> [Makefile:20: utp_book.pdf] Error 1
>
>
> I do have the ghostscript package installed at version 9.27 so I have a
> path of: '/usr/s
Marc Chantreux wrote:
>
> hello,
>
>> - Update Chapter 3 to cover Vim (including gvim)
>
> please don't!
>
> what's nice about reading UTP is to discover the elegance and simplicity
> of it all …
>
> i'm a vibrant fan of vim but i have to admit that even to me, vim don't
> belong to this w
On 2020-10-20 Deri wrote:
> It is looking for the fonts in the ghostscript 9.26 directories
> but debian have updated to 9.27. You will have a file called
> "download" probably in /usr/share/groff/1.22.4/font/devpdf, if
> you edit this file to convert all references 9.26 to 9.27, you
> should be
On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 09:33:02AM -0400, Larry Kollar wrote:
>
> Marc Chantreux wrote:
> >
> > hello,
> >
> >> - Update Chapter 3 to cover Vim (including gvim)
> >
> > please don't!
> >
> > what's nice about reading UTP is to discover the elegance and simplicity
> > of it all ???
> >
> > i
This bug is acknowledged in pdfmom(1) in section Bugs :
pdfmom sometimes issues warnings of the type
...: can't transparently output node at top level
but this is more of an annoyance than a bug, and may safely be
ignored.
Regards, Thomas
‐‐‐ Original Mes
Hi,
Larry Kollar wrote on Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 09:33:02AM -0400:
> I've not used another editor where you can pipe chunks of
> text *ad hoc* through scripts or even awk/perl one-liners.
That doesn't require vim(1) at all. I do that all the time
with vanilla vi(1), for example "!}fmt" to automat
On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 04:30:10PM +0200, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Larry Kollar wrote on Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 09:33:02AM -0400:
>
> > I've not used another editor where you can pipe chunks of
> > text *ad hoc* through scripts or even awk/perl one-liners.
>
> That doesn't require vim(1) at
On Tuesday, 20 October 2020 14:49:22 BST Morten Bo Johansen wrote:
> Wouldn't it rather be that it is looking for a version >= 9.26,
> but failing that, just prints out that it can't find the lowest
> accepted version?
>
> I have 9.52 and my book compiles with no problems.
>
> Maybe do a reinstal
On 20.10.20 16:05, Larry McVoy wrote:
On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 09:33:02AM -0400, Larry Kollar wrote:
Marc Chantreux wrote:
hello,
- Update Chapter 3 to cover Vim (including gvim)
please don't!
what's nice about reading UTP is to discover the elegance and simplicity
of it all ???
i'm a v
Hi Johann,
Johann Höchtl writes:
> After that many years it might pleasantly surprise you that even modern
> Vim still retains the notion of its ancestry by supporting section
> movements and accounting for the corresponding nroff directives/macros:
This is even specified by POSIX: it requires th
On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 12:02:43PM -0600, Anthony J. Bentley wrote:
> By the way, Vim's infinite undo clearly violates the published
> standard (POSIX is clear that u undoes u)
I'm pretty sure there is a variable you can set to get vim to conform
with the standard. That said, I consider vim to be
* On 2020 20 Oct 08:35 -0500, Deri wrote:
> It is looking for the fonts in the ghostscript 9.26 directories but
> debian have updated to 9.27. You will have a file called "download"
> probably in /usr/share/groff/1.22.4/font/devpdf, if you edit this file
> to convert all references 9.26 to 9.27,
> Should we talk about newer groff macro packages like -mom?
> What about utilities and preprocessors?
Absolutely.
I imagine this turning into a collaboration of many authors and editors,
with most concentrating on just the chapters where their expertise is greatest.
> > * improve the chapter to take advantage of modern implementations of
> > vi in modern unix.
>
> Your last point was exactly where I was going with this. Having your editor
> (gvim in this case) in one window, and your shell in another, makes life so
> much easier, for example. Cherry-pick one
On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 07:05:33AM -0700, Larry McVoy wrote:
> The one thing I'd support adding for vim is :split as that is a pretty
> big improvement over traditional vi.
correct! very useful too and this is available as :Edit in simpler
implementations of vi.
regards,
marc
On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 05:56:46PM +1100, Damian McGuckin wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Oct 2020, Larry Kollar wrote:
>
> > To be honest, I can?t believe over a fourth of my life has gone by since
> > we started the transcription.
>
> The scarier thought is when you realize that you wrote your first tutor
Hi Ingo,
On Thu, Oct 15 2020 at 05:32:32 PM, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
> Meanwhile, i heard rumours that the upcoming change in libc that will
> cause %n in writeable memory to abort the program will cause some
> gnulib ./configure tests to (wrongly) fail, again resulting in
> compilation of vasnprint
Hi,
On Mon, Oct 12 2020 at 01:32:37 AM, Bertrand Garrigues
wrote:
> 1.23 looks prettier to me too; so I will first make a 1.23.rc1 tag. I
> just need to check that the non-numerical 'rc' won't harm, for example
> if a something attempts to check the patch number.
Building a 1.23.rc1 tag unexpe
Ingo Schwarze wrote:
>> I've not used another editor where you can pipe chunks of
>> text *ad hoc* through scripts or even awk/perl one-liners.
>
> That doesn't require vim(1) at all. I do that all the time
> with vanilla vi(1), for example "!}fmt" to automatically
> line-break a paragraph of
Thomas Dupond wrote:
>
> This bug is acknowledged in pdfmom(1) in section Bugs :
>
> pdfmom sometimes issues warnings of the type
> ...: can't transparently output node at top level
> but this is more of an annoyance than a bug, and may safely be
> ignored.
OK,
No errors building on my up-to-date Debian Testing (Bullseye) laptop. A
few minor warnings of table width:
$ make
/usr/bin/groff -Tpdf -P-pletter -z -step -rpdf:bm.nr=1 -ms -rRef=1 -wall
utp_book.t >/dev/null 2>utp.aux.tmp; \
mv utp.aux.tmp utp.aux; \
/usr/bin/awk -f toc.awk utp.aux >toc.t.tmp;
24 matches
Mail list logo
