I can try using .SA 0 or .SA 1 as appropriate. .MT I can't use as I
don't want any of its settings interfering with my own settings. I
don't know what .COVER does (all my docs and experience with mm is old-
school).
Re-reading the doclifter man page, I see that it only implies that it
uses the file suffix: it just says that it won't recognise an mm file
unless the file (also) has a .mm extension. I quote:
For a document to be recognized as containing mm markup, it must have
the extension .mm. This avoids problems with false positives.
It would be good to document in the man page the heuristics that you do
use for mm detection (.SA, .MT, .COVER). None of the documents I've
written, over a period of decades, has ever used any of these, so I
would never have guessed without your information.
What do you think of the idea of adding an explicit argument that tells
doclifter what macro package it should use, and thus remove the
guesswork? Just like troff had.
Thanks for the follow-up - at least now I know what to try.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/924861
Title:
doclifter does not recognise mm macro files
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/doclifter/+bug/924861/+subscriptions
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
