Your message dated Wed, 18 Nov 2020 20:22:06 +1100
with message-id <[email protected]>
and subject line Re: incorrect warning about .XX being an invalid macro
has caused the Debian Bug report #553136,
regarding incorrect warning about .XX being an invalid macro
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected]
immediately.)
--
553136: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=553136
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: man-db
Version: 2.5.6-3
Severity: normal
File: /usr/bin/man
From
http://neil.brown.name/git?p=mdadm;a=commit;h=d1302dd801ffa4ad8b65bee02cefa0459b0860e3
it looks like man might be a little too rigorous in checking for
invalid macros:
LANG=C man --warnings -l mdadm.8 > /dev/null
complains that '.XX' is an invalid macro.
This is not correct. The sequence
.ig XX
anything can go here
.XX
is correct and is ignored (see 'info groff' and the 'ig' index
entry).
However the same can be achieved with
.ig
anything can go there
..
and this produces no warnings.
--
.''`. martin f. krafft <[email protected]> Related projects:
: :' : proud Debian developer http://debiansystem.info
`. `'` http://people.debian.org/~madduck http://vcs-pkg.org
`- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems
digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
groff is working as documented, and Heirloom Doctools troff works the
same way. I'd bet that V7 Unix troff does as well, but I'm too lazy to
fire up SIMH for this.
As with .de, .ig takes an optional "end macro" name (not to be confused
with an end-of-input macro designated by the .em request).
Because non-GNU roffs typically issue as few diagnostics as possible,
and therefore emit no message when an undefined macro is called, many
people think that the "end" argument to requests like .de and .ig is a
mere string used for pattern matching so that the formatter knows when
the "body" of the request is done--by analogy to here documents in the
shell.
But no, these aren't mere patterns, they are macros, and they will be
called if they exist. And if warnings are dialed up, you'll get a
warning if they're not.
I'm attaching a demonstration.
Here's what the groff Texinfo manual says.
-- Request: .ig [end]
Ignore all input until 'gtroff' encounters the macro named '.'END
on a line by itself (or '..' if END is not specified). This is
useful for commenting out large blocks of text:
[...]
Regards,
Branden
ig-XX.roff
Description: Troff document
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
--- End Message ---
