Re: [PATCH 4/6] doc: POSIX 2004 added xargs option -p and removed -e and -i.
On 7/8/26 23:37, James Youngman wrote: We should get the "check-all-manpages" check to run with syntax-checks. I thought about that as well. Technically, that would simply be: $ GIT_PAGER= git diff -U0 diff --git a/cfg.mk b/cfg.mk index 51afb74b..4fc3f408 100644 --- a/cfg.mk +++ b/cfg.mk @@ -315,0 +316,3 @@ sc_standard_outputs: +# Include the manpage check in syntax-check. +sc_check-all-manpages: check-all-manpages + OTOH the output format is so much different that I find it quite disturbing to have chek-all-manpages squashed into the syntax-checks. > I'd prefer \[dq]\[dq] over the single-quote> option, because although I am aware that groff renders a "single quote" in different ways in different circumstances, I'm not familiar enough with the details to be confident that \*' won't ever give a surprising result. Well, Brandon suggested using this, and \*' is already in. But I'm fine with double quotes as well. Have a nice day, Berny
Re: [PATCH 4/6] doc: POSIX 2004 added xargs option -p and removed -e and -i.
Thanks for the fix. We should get the "check-all-manpages" check to run with syntax-checks. I'd prefer \[dq]\[dq] over the single-quote option, because although I am aware that groff renders a "single quote" in different ways in different circumstances, I'm not familiar enough with the details to be confident that \*' won't ever give a surprising result. James. On Wed, Jul 8, 2026 at 9:29 PM Bernhard Voelker wrote: > > Hi James, > > I like all the recent manpage improvements, thanks! > > On 7/8/26 10:09, James Youngman wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 7, 2026 at 7:56 AM Bernhard Voelker > > wrote: > >> man swallows the "" as an empty second argumment to .B syntax. > >> I propose using the following instead: > >> > >> .B \-E \*(lq\*(rq > > > > Thanks for spotting the problem. I actually used \[dq]\[dq] so that > > people can copy the text from the manpage (i.e. the output of "man > > xargs") into a shell script and get the intended effect. > > Good point! > > BTW: Looking into the STANDARDS CONFORMANCE section, we have already -E '' > with: >.B \-E \*'\*' > Would you prefer single-quotes over double-quotes here for consistency? > > > I've pushed the attached trivial patch to avoid 'make check-all-manpages' > errors. > > Have a nice day, > Berny >
Re: [PATCH 4/6] doc: POSIX 2004 added xargs option -p and removed -e and -i.
Hi James, I like all the recent manpage improvements, thanks! On 7/8/26 10:09, James Youngman wrote: On Tue, Jul 7, 2026 at 7:56 AM Bernhard Voelker wrote: man swallows the "" as an empty second argumment to .B syntax. I propose using the following instead: .B \-E \*(lq\*(rq Thanks for spotting the problem. I actually used \[dq]\[dq] so that people can copy the text from the manpage (i.e. the output of "man xargs") into a shell script and get the intended effect. Good point! BTW: Looking into the STANDARDS CONFORMANCE section, we have already -E '' with: .B \-E \*'\*' Would you prefer single-quotes over double-quotes here for consistency? I've pushed the attached trivial patch to avoid 'make check-all-manpages' errors. Have a nice day, Berny From c239984c8c79e5e5137019142bdd2f1f03c6d918 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Bernhard Voelker Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2026 22:19:19 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] maint: avoid check-all-manpages errors 'make check-all-manpages' complains: troff:./xargs.1:155: warning: macro '"' not defined an.tmac:./xargs.1:571: style: blank line in input * xargs/xargs.1: Fix comment start. Eliminate blank line. --- xargs/xargs.1 | 10 +- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/xargs/xargs.1 b/xargs/xargs.1 index ab0fa7c0..e140581f 100644 --- a/xargs/xargs.1 +++ b/xargs/xargs.1 @@ -152,10 +152,10 @@ Other implementations of .B xargs may have a default logical end-of-file string, so if you want to portably ensure that no logical end-of-file string is in use, use -." \[dq] below is a neutral double-quote, reflecting the use of this -." punctuation in shell code. \*(lq\*(rq would produce a left and right -." double-quote, and so would not give the intended effect if the user -." copies the text into a shell script. +.\" \[dq] below is a neutral double-quote, reflecting the use of this +.\" punctuation in shell code. \*(lq\*(rq would produce a left and right +.\" double-quote, and so would not give the intended effect if the user +.\" copies the text into a shell script. .B \-E \[dq]\[dq] to disable the logical end-of-file string. See also STANDARDS CONFORMANCE. @@ -568,7 +568,7 @@ This section describes the relationship between GNU .B xargs and the standards with which it complies. Some portability considerations are mentioned. - +. .SS OPTIONS Options specified in IEEE Std 1003.1, 2024 are .BR \-E , -- 2.54.0
Re: [PATCH 4/6] doc: POSIX 2004 added xargs option -p and removed -e and -i.
On Tue, Jul 7, 2026 at 7:56 AM Bernhard Voelker wrote: > man swallows the "" as an empty second argumment to .B syntax. > I propose using the following instead: > >.B \-E \*(lq\*(rq Thanks for spotting the problem. I actually used \[dq]\[dq] so that people can copy the text from the manpage (i.e. the output of "man xargs") into a shell script and get the intended effect. James.
Re: [PATCH 4/6] doc: POSIX 2004 added xargs option -p and removed -e and -i.
Many thanks for all the doc updates. On 7/6/26 22:06, James Youngman wrote: diff --git a/xargs/xargs.1 b/xargs/xargs.1 index 9f750c43..b7111c19 100644 --- a/xargs/xargs.1 +++ b/xargs/xargs.1 @@ -148,6 +148,13 @@ If neither nor .B \-e is used, no end-of-file string is used. +Other implementations of +.B xargs +may have a default logical end-of-file string, so if you want to +portably ensure that no logical end-of-file string is in use, use +.B \-E "" man swallows the "" as an empty second argumment to .B syntax. I propose using the following instead: .B \-E \*(lq\*(rq +to disable the logical end-of-file string. +See also STANDARDS CONFORMANCE. . .TP .\" We use font selection escape sequences here because usage of `\c` in Thanks & have a nice day, Berny
