[adding groff list so that more people can argue with me, since I once
again found a soapbox to mount]
At 2023-07-30T18:14:53+0200, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> On 2023-07-30 18:13, G. Branden Robinson wrote:
> > I think this is a matter of achieving an accurate and unambiguous
> > synopsis grammar.
On Monday, 31 July 2023 10:05:18 BST Alexis wrote:
> Hello folks,
>
> I was looking for a visual reference of all the colors available with
> GNU roff. Yet a quick search on the mailing list archive did not
> produce any meaningful results. If you believe I missed related
> threads I'd appreciate
Thank you for the clarification, Deri, that makes a lot of sense.
I should've read pdf.tmac more closely and not just grep'ed for
'^\.defcolor' before making such a claim :)
On 7/29/23 10:05 PM, Bjarni Ingi Gislason wrote:
Simply add
.if t .tr ~\(ti
to "tmac/an.tmac",
instead of changing (hard coding) it in the sources (man pages).
This is probably excellent advice for the distros, but not something bash
is going to do.
--
``The lyf so short, the craft so
Hi Lennart,
At 2023-07-31T11:48:22+, Lennart Jablonka wrote:
> Quoth G. Branden Robinson:
> > "[-v ...]" would imply that only "-v -v -v" is allowed, instead of
> > "-vvv".
>
> Only if you can’t group options.
I term this "clustering", but yes. And most Unix `argv` interpreters
support doin
I’d argue that’s acceptable for those utilities adhering to the POSIX
Utility Syntax Guidelines; that is, those that just use getopt. And
thus,
foobar [-v ...]
-v ... Be more verbose. This options can be specified
multiple times to increase the verbosity lev
Hi Lennart,
At 2023-07-31T18:40:11+, Lennart Jablonka wrote:
> > > I’d argue that’s acceptable for those utilities adhering to the
> > > POSIX Utility Syntax Guidelines; that is, those that just use
> > > getopt.
[...]
> Actually, reading it again, I would just drop the ellipsis.
>
> f
Hi Jakub, Branden, Ingo
On 2023-08-01 00:16, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * G. Branden Robinson , 2023-07-31 12:52:
>> Use the man(7) macro `MR`, new to groff 1.23.0,
>
> Given that this version of groff was released approximately yesterday¹,
> this is very premature.
>
> NACK from me.
I included that,
Hi Branden,
On 2023-08-01 00:20, G. Branden Robinson wrote:
>>> Thanks for raising this. The fix was straightforward, and you can
>>> expect it in my next push to groff Git.[9]
>
> I may not be willing to die on this hill, but I'm willing to risk being
> MEDEVACed from it. It won't matter, if
Hi Branden,
On 2023-08-01 00:50, G. Branden Robinson wrote:
> Hi Alex,
>
> At 2023-07-31T23:47:50+0200, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
>>> When the text of all Linux man-pages documents (excluding those
>>> containing only `so` requests) is dumped, with adjustment mode 'l'
>>> ("-dAD=l") and automatic
10 matches
Mail list logo
