On Mon Jun 20 11:50:34 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > If I typeset this with 'groff -ms', I get the example text > > with no left margin. It seems at least some of the .nr or > > .po requests are executed even though they are inside > > '.ig' ... '..'. > > > > If I remove the .ig section (and its contents), I get a margin > > which seems to be the -ms default and all is well. > > > > Or have I misunderstood the .ig request completely? > > I don't see any unexpected behaviour, if I format your example with > nroff -ms.
I didn't try nroff, only groff. > `.nr LL 100n' does not assign any new value to \n(LL, neither does > `.nr PO .7i' to \n(PO, nor `.nr PI 3n' to \n(PI. I *do* see a > "number register `PO' not defined" warning, when `.po \n(POu' is > read, but as I interpret `groff info' for the `.ig' request, that > is correct behaviour. What part of the info documentation for .ig are you referring to? As I read it, it's a way of commenting out a big chunk of the input. Surely that should mean that the commented-out section isn't interpreted? I also see the "number register PO' not defined" you mention when using nroff, but I expect my document to be broken under nroff right now. To summarize: solaris troff : adding the .ig section doesn't change output groff 1.18.1.1: same here groff, CVS : adding the .ig section kills the left margin BR, Jörgen -- // Jörgen Grahn "Koka lopplummer, bada Ross, loppor borta." \X/ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- Jonas _______________________________________________ Groff mailing list Groff@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/groff
