At 2020-07-24T12:37:26-0400, Larry Kollar wrote:
> G. Branden Robinson wrote:
> >
> > Hmm! It seems the ms stuff in our Texinfo manual may have started
> > life as an ms document after all.
> >
> > IIRC, Larry Kollar is sometimes seen on this list. Maybe he'd be
> > willing to share a copy of
G. Branden Robinson wrote:
>
> Hmm! It seems the ms stuff in our Texinfo manual may have started life
> as an ms document after all.
>
> IIRC, Larry Kollar is sometimes seen on this list. Maybe he'd be
> willing to share a copy of the ms sources so we don't have to backport
> it from Texinfo
Hi James,
James K. Lowden wrote on Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 09:45:17AM -0400:
> On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 20:36:31 +0200 Ingo Schwarze wrote:
>> I don't see any practical relevance to the question where exactly the
>> boundary between the "user manual" and the "reference manual" part
>> is.
> I'm not
At 2020-06-30T04:18:00+1000, John Gardner wrote:
> Groff *can* generate high-quality manuals, it *can* generate HTML
> output, and it *can* generate indexes — AFAIK, the only thing it
> *can't* do that Texinfo can is compile binary `.info` files. But even
> that could be achieved by adding a new
Well said, James. Fully agreed on all points.
> A convenient GUI viewer -- with hyperlinks and proportional fonts --
> would "advertise" groff and cement its position as the best free
> documenation system there is, bar none.
I started work on such a thing. Basically, it's an Electron-based
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 03:08:04 +1000
"G. Branden Robinson" wrote:
> At 2020-06-14T14:40:44+1000, John Gardner wrote:
> > Why are we using Info, again? Was it because of GNU policy?
>
> Yes. https://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/standards.html#GNU-Manuals
>
> Aside from the mandate of the source
On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 20:36:31 +0200
Ingo Schwarze wrote:
> I don't see any practical relevance to the question where exactly the
> boundary between the "user manual" and the "reference manual" part
> is.
I'm not sure what you're saying. If you mean you don't know how you
would divide the
On 6/29/20, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
> I like the idea of converting it to -ms somewhat less. I mean, we
> have groff documentation split out into info(1), man(1), and HTML
> (for mom) - do we really need a fourth format?
It's more than three currently. The pic(1) manual doc/pic.ms is
already in
On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 14:36:31 -0400,
> G. Branden Robinson wrote on Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 03:08:04AM +1000:
> > [1] The only painful part of this is losing Larry Kollar's ms node,
> > which is the _only_ macro package that has ever documented well in
> > Texinfo as far as I can tell. I think it
Branden,
Excellent fixes. Thank you!
Doug
> I never saw the point of groff_diff(7).
It's an excellent summary of how groff differs to classical troff,
highlights potential portability issues (a.k.a., "groff-isms"), and also
documents known incompatibilities with legacy syntax.
If maintaining groff_diff(7) alongside another document with
Hi Branden,
G. Branden Robinson wrote on Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 03:08:04AM +1000:
> == PROPOSAL ==
>
> Chapter 1 (Introduction): Retain.
> Chapter 2 (Invoking groff): Drop; direct users to groff(1).
> Chapter 3 (Tutorial for Macro Users): Retain.
> Chapter 4 (Macro Packages): Drop. (See [1]
> There is a place for a book-like work, I think.
I agree, but using a different typesetting system to prepare it is a wasted
opportunity, IMHO. Groff *can* generate high-quality manuals, it *can* generate
HTML output, and it *can* generate indexes — AFAIK, the only thing it
*can't* do that
At 2020-06-14T14:40:44+1000, John Gardner wrote:
> Why are we using Info, again? Was it because of GNU policy?
Yes. https://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/standards.html#GNU-Manuals
Aside from the mandate of the source document format, I find the advice
there fairly sound, as far as it goes. I do
Hi Doug!
At 2020-06-13T15:42:00-0400, Doug McIlroy wrote:
> groff(7) doesn't tell what the hyphenation modes are.
It does, but you have to know to scroll down to the "Hyphenation"
section of the page. I've just now committed a fix for this and several
other issues.
> It directs you to info for
On 14/06/20 14:40:44, John Gardner wrote:
Why are we using Info, again? Was it because of GNU policy? Or is
there a more compelling reason as to why we're maintaining two
different versions of the same documentation?
There are probably two reasons why Doug has referenced info.
First, he
Why are we using Info, again? Was it because of GNU policy? Or is there a
more compelling reason as to why we're maintaining two different versions
of the same documentation?
On Sun, 14 Jun 2020 5:42 am Doug McIlroy wrote:
> groff(7) doesn't tell what the hyphenation modes are.
> It directs you
groff(7) doesn't tell what the hyphenation modes are.
It directs you to info for the "gory details".
But info doesn't tell everything either. It omits .hy 0·
Mode bits 2, 4, and 8 turn off certain hyphenations.
A literal reading of info would have .hy 0 turn them on.
Since groff(7) is otherwise
18 matches
Mail list logo
