At 2025-11-15T21:13:29+0100, Bernhard Voelker wrote: > On 11/15/25 20:03, James Youngman wrote: > > Two patches attached; the second automates the kinds of lint checks > > Branden recommended. The first fixes a problem that the new lint > > check would have objected to. > > Sorry, I'm a bit confused. > > > [PATCH 1/2] Fix some lint problems in the find manual page. > > This overlaps with Branden's patches, doesn't it? > * [PATCH 01/40] Fix troff error in find(1). > * [PATCH 02/40] Replace UTF-8 character sequence in find(1)
I don't personally mind. To my view, they're obvious correctness fixes
and integrating these fixes "early" won't make my "v2" patch submission
appreciably more difficult. I'm pretty seasoned with "git rebase". :)
> >+ messages="$( ${GROFF} -t -z -ww -rCHECKSTYLE=2 -man
> >${srcdir}/${manpage} 2>&1 )"
> __________________________________________^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Is there a reason you used value 2 here?
> The original suggestion was using 3:
>
> >> groff -C -t -z -ww -rCHECKSTYLE=3 -man $(CHECKABLEMANS)
"Level 3", if you will, adds checks for only 2 things: blank lines and
leading spaces. Both of those are "cosmetic" issues; they can only make
the output a little less pretty (excessive vertical space and breaks in
weird places, respectively), but can't make it incorrect. Not in prose,
anyway.
https://cgit.git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/groff.git/tree/tmac/an.tmac?h=1.23.0#n75
Regards,
Branden
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
