Re: mandoc for report writing?

Hi Steve, Steve Litt wrote on Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 02:31:38PM -0400: > On Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:51:42 +0200 > Ingo Schwarze wrote: >> + Mandoc supports converting your paper to markdown format, >>just in case you want to publish in on github, too. > I've heard

Re: mandoc for report writing?

On Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:51:42 +0200 Ingo Schwarze wrote: > Hi Paul, > > Paul Swanson wrote on Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 07:09:39PM +: > > > Has anyone had any experience with using mandoc for report > > writing? > > I doubt that. > > > I rea

Re: mandoc for report writing?

Hi Paul, Paul Swanson wrote on Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 07:09:39PM +: > Has anyone had any experience with using mandoc for report writing? I doubt that. > I realise it may be a silly / naive question. > > But in recent times I've started using groff (with grefer) to write >

mandoc for report writing?

Hello, Has anyone had any experience with using mandoc for report writing? I realise it may be a silly / naive question. But in recent times I've started using groff (with grefer) to write academic papers, because it's relatively easy to use for my purposes. As such, it got me wondering

Re: Substitute mandoc for tlb command

Артур Истомин writes: > I need t command to accomplish example from "The AWK Programming Language" > book. > Is it possible somehow substitute it with mandoc? Yes, simply substitute mandoc for tbl and the examples in the book will work. Just make sure to render the output

Re: Substitute mandoc for tlb command

> On 8. Feb 2019, at 16:22, Артур Истомин wrote: > > I need t command to accomplish example from "The AWK Programming Language" > book. > Is it possible somehow substitute it with mandoc? > > Thanks! > you are funny -- Tony GPG-FP: 49CC8250 CDCF2183

Substitute mandoc for tlb command

I need t command to accomplish example from "The AWK Programming Language" book. Is it possible somehow substitute it with mandoc? Thanks!

Re: mandoc -Tlint requires Mdocdate and RCS id

Hi Jan, Jan Stary wrote on Wed, Nov 08, 2017 at 04:13:19PM +0100: > this is a minimalized manpage that currently fails mandoc -Tlint: > > .Dd November 8, 2017 > .Dt AUDIO 3 > .Os > .Sh NAME > .Nm libaudio This is broken, .Dt/.Nm mismatch. Mandoc should probably warn

mandoc -Tlint requires Mdocdate and RCS id

Hi Ingo, this is a minimalized manpage that currently fails mandoc -Tlint: .Dd November 8, 2017 .Dt AUDIO 3 .Os .Sh NAME .Nm libaudio .Nd manipulate digital audio formats and files .Sh SYNOPSIS .In audio.h .Ft AUFILE* .Fn au_open "const char* path" "AUMODE mode" "

Re: mandoc output paper size

[Buggerit, dropped the list so sent again.] On 10/30/17 12:38, Jan Stary wrote: Hi Ingo, hi Mike, See below for what i committed to -current. It would be quite welcome if Jan could test on his multi-tray printer that the printer actually selects the right paper for different -Opaper= options

Re: mandoc output paper size

Hi Ingo, hi Mike, > See below for what i committed to -current. It would be quite > welcome if Jan could test on his multi-tray printer that the printer > actually selects the right paper for different -Opaper= options > now, and that there are no errors or warnings. For each of a3.pdf, a4.pdf,

Re: mandoc output paper size

gt; and for providing so much context. That really helped to improve >> mandoc PostScript output. > No problem. I do have an interest in this since this is my day work. > The better the PS/PDF driver the fewer support calls I have to deal with ;) Wow. It's always interesting to

Re: mandoc output paper size

selection. [...] It may be useful to use a media name such as man-A4, man-letter, etc. Thanks a lot for pointing me to the relevant features and documentation and for providing so much context. That really helped to improve mandoc PostScript output. No problem. I do have an interest

Re: mandoc output paper size

seful to use a media name such as man-A4, man-letter, etc. Thanks a lot for pointing me to the relevant features and documentation and for providing so much context. That really helped to improve mandoc PostScript output. See below for what i committed to -current. It would be quite welcome if Ja

Re: mandoc output paper size

t;> > >> which apparently are the right dimensions. However, > >> the Minolta will print all of them on A4 paper, > >> although it does have a stash of A3 and A5 too. > >> > >> That's where I thought it might take a hint from the DSC comment, >

Re: mandoc output paper size

() () which apparently are the right dimensions. However, the Minolta will print all of them on A4 paper, although it does have a stash of A3 and A5 too. That's where I thought it might take a hint from the DSC comment, if I changed the "Default" to "A3" or "A4" or "

Re: mandoc output paper size

Minolta will print all of them on A4 paper, > although it does have a stash of A3 and A5 too. > > That's where I thought it might take a hint from the DSC comment, > if I changed the "Default" to "A3" or "A4" or "A5", or if mandoc(1) > itself put th

Re: mandoc output paper size

Hi Walter, Walter Alejandro Iglesias wrote on Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 12:12:21PM +0200: > First of all, I'm just a user like you trying to figure out > how things work. So am I. That's how it starts. I also read documentation, standards, and code at need, and start fixing them once i understand

Re: mandoc output paper size

In article <20171027104221.gd9...@www.stare.cz> Jan Stary <h...@stare.cz> wrote: > On Oct 27 12:12:21, w...@roquesor.com wrote: > > In article <20171026193138.ga41...@www.stare.cz> Jan Stary <h...@stare.cz> > > wrote: > > > > > > In

Re: mandoc output paper size

On Oct 27 12:12:21, w...@roquesor.com wrote: > In article <20171026193138.ga41...@www.stare.cz> Jan Stary <h...@stare.cz> > wrote: > > > > > In the ps file generated by mandoc you should have this line: > > > > > > > > > > %%Docume

Re: mandoc output paper size

In article <20171026193138.ga41...@www.stare.cz> Jan Stary <h...@stare.cz> wrote: > > > > In the ps file generated by mandoc you should have this line: > > > > > > > > %%DocumentMedia: Default 595 841 0 () () > > > > > > >

Re: mandoc output paper size

Hi Jan, Jan Stary wrote on Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 09:31:38PM +0200: >>>> In the ps file generated by mandoc you should have this line: >>>> >>>> %%DocumentMedia: Default 595 841 0 () () >>>> >>>> Where 595 841 correspond to A4.

Re: mandoc output paper size

s override it with tools; but occassionaly a printer > will choke on a file with "unknown" page size. I don't understand what you mean by "unknown page size". Can you provide an example of such a file to me privately - if possible generated by mandoc(1), otherwise any such file? Yours, Ingo

Re: mandoc output paper size

> > > In the ps file generated by mandoc you should have this line: > > > > > > %%DocumentMedia: Default 595 841 0 () () > > > > > > Where 595 841 correspond to A4. If you set output paper to "letter" > > > that line will s

Re: mandoc output paper size

Hi Walter, Walter Alejandro Iglesias wrote on Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 05:11:10PM +0200: > https://www.gnu.org/software/gv/manual/gv.html\ > #Paper-Keywords-and-paper-size-in-points Mandoc uses the exact paper size as specified by ISO 216 in millimeters: A3 297 x 420 A4 210 x 297 A

Re: mandoc output paper size

C:papersize letter > > That is automatically generated at GNU troff build time, controlled > by files generated by autoconf, controlled by files generated by > automake, controlled by files autogenerated by whatever (insert > your favourite rabbit hole here). > > In any case, the

Re: mandoc output paper size

Hi Amelia, Amelia A Lewis wrote on Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 10:41:55AM -0400: > On Thu, 26 Oct 2017 16:14:36 +0200 (CEST), Walter Alejandro Iglesias wrote: >> In the ps file generated by mandoc you should have this line: >> >> %%DocumentMedia: Default 595 841 0 () ()

Re: mandoc output paper size

any case, the fact that groff defaults to "papersize letter" is the reason why mandoc(1) does the same. Unless there are strong reasons to diverge, mandoc aims for compatibility with groff. Yours, Ingo

Re: mandoc output paper size

Answering myself. In article Walter Alejandro Iglesias wrote: > As a side note. You made me realize of something I didn't notice when > I migrated to openbsd; I have files generated with GNU roff that > defaults to letter size. This

Re: mandoc output paper size

In article <20171026104155982590.bfb59...@talsever.com> Amelia A Lewis <amyz...@talsever.com> wrote: > On Thu, 26 Oct 2017 16:14:36 +0200 (CEST), Walter Alejandro Iglesias > wrote: > > In the ps file generated by mandoc you should have this line: > > > >

Re: mandoc output paper size

On Thu, 26 Oct 2017 16:14:36 +0200 (CEST), Walter Alejandro Iglesias wrote: > In the ps file generated by mandoc you should have this line: > > %%DocumentMedia: Default 595 841 0 () () > > Where 595 841 correspond to A4. If you set output paper to "letter&q

Re: mandoc output paper size

On 10/26/2017 02:25 PM, Jan Stary wrote: > On Oct 26 11:36:45, w...@roquesor.com wrote: >> In article <20171026083919.ga38...@www.stare.cz> Jan Stary >> wrote: >>> I am not sure whether man -Tpdf and man -Tps honour the paper size. >> >> I think it does. >> >> I don't have a

Re: mandoc output paper size

you want in the gv(1) window, > but that don't make it so. My point is that files which really are A4 > just already say so in the gv(1) box, without "selecting it alternatively". In the ps file generated by mandoc you should have this line: %%DocumentMedia: Default 595 841 0 () (

Re: mandoc output paper size

On Thu, 26 Oct 2017 14:25:07 +0200, Jan Stary wrote: > Yes it does. But why does it say e.g. "y841x595" instead of A4? > (Maybe "A4" is just a shorthand for that, I don't know). I don't think so. If that's the actual target size, it seems to be A1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_216#A_series

Re: mandoc output paper size

On Oct 26 11:36:45, w...@roquesor.com wrote: > In article <20171026083919.ga38...@www.stare.cz> Jan Stary > wrote: > > I am not sure whether man -Tpdf and man -Tps honour the paper size. > > I think it does. > > I don't have a printer at hand to verify it but if in the gv(1)

Re: mandoc output paper size

In article <20171026083919.ga38...@www.stare.cz> Jan Stary wrote: > I am not sure whether man -Tpdf and man -Tps honour the paper size. I think it does. I don't have a printer at hand to verify it but if in the gv(1) menu I select alternativelly A4 (or Letter) and Default I can

mandoc output paper size

This is -current/amd64. My /etc/man.conf in its entirety is 'output paper a4'. The A4 paper size is what we mostly use around these parts; otherwise I would not even have a man.conf of course. I am not sure whether man -Tpdf and man -Tps honour the paper size. man -Tpdf sox > man.pdf man

Re: PDF produced by mandoc

e seeing the same? > > Apparently, bugs are immortal: they never die from old age. > > This was a group of three bugs all more than seven years old. > Quite an accomplishment to find bugs of that age in mandoc, > given how often much of the code kept getting re-written and &

Re: PDF produced by mandoc

mmortal: they never die from old age. This was a group of three bugs all more than seven years old. Quite an accomplishment to find bugs of that age in mandoc, given how often much of the code kept getting re-written and re-re-written while we slowly learnt how languages work. But it looks like n

PDF produced by mandoc

This is current/amd64. I just produced a pdf of bc(1) with "man -Tpdf bc > bc.pdf". Trying to view that pdf with mupdf(1) complains thusly: (I can view and print the PDF fine though) warning: expected 'endobj' or 'stream' keyword (27 0 R) warning: expected 'endobj' or 'stream'

Re: opportunity to help: %s audit in mandoc

Hi everybody, Here is an updated list after doing what I said yesterday. One nit: I count 25 instances in cgi.c, not 27. // 27 cgi.c: all ok // 317: msg is only NULL when status == 200 // 351,353,379,405,409,421,425,497,499,527: compile-time string // constants and/or

Re: opportunity to help: %s audit in mandoc

s,misc@}, >> >> Ingo Schwarze <schwa...@usta.de> writes: >> >> > Hi Dariusz, >> > >> > Dariusz Sendkowski wrote on Sun, Aug 07, 2016 at 08:27:07PM +0200: >> > >> >> OK, but from which branch? >> > >>

Re: opportunity to help: %s audit in mandoc

08:27:07PM +0200: > > > >> OK, but from which branch? > > > > We don't use branches in OpenBSD. > > Just use the HEAD of the OpenBSD CVS repository. > > > > You don't need to worry about merging to the portable mandoc > > on mdocml.bsd.lv. That's a n

Re: opportunity to help: %s audit in mandoc

VS repository. > > You don't need to worry about merging to the portable mandoc > on mdocml.bsd.lv. That's a no-brainer i'll take care of. > >> Can the results be sent incrementally? > > Yes, that's ideal. > > Don't work for days before sending anything. Imagine you misunde

Re: opportunity to help: %s audit in mandoc

Hi Dariusz, Dariusz Sendkowski wrote on Sun, Aug 07, 2016 at 08:27:07PM +0200: > OK, but from which branch? We don't use branches in OpenBSD. Just use the HEAD of the OpenBSD CVS repository. You don't need to worry about merging to the portable mandoc on mdocml.bsd.lv. That's a no-brai

Re: opportunity to help: %s audit in mandoc

seful opportunity. Take the code in > /usr/src/usr.bin/mandoc/, grep(1) it for "%s", and audit all instances > you find, figuring out whether they can be reached with the char * > being NULL or not. If you find one where the pointer can be NULL, > construct an input file and

opportunity to help: %s audit in mandoc

Hi, from time to time, people ask how they can help OpenBSD development if they are new to that task. Right now, there is a useful opportunity. Take the code in /usr/src/usr.bin/mandoc/, grep(1) it for "%s", and audit all instances you find, figuring out whether they can

Re: rcs mandoc nits

On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 09:41:42PM +0200, Jan Stary wrote: This is small diff to the manpages in /usr/src/usr.bin/rcs What is the advantage of using '\*(Lt' instead of '' ? Is that advantage also valid for things like \*(Ltstdio.h\*(Gt ? All the other ''s and ''s are typed literally ...

Re: yacc(1) mandoc nits

On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 10:49:27PM +0200, Jan Stary wrote: Tha yacc(1) manpage uses .Tn LALR(1) .Tn LR(1) I don't think LALR or LR is a tradename. This seems to be what mdoc(7) describes as: Since this macro is often implemented to use a small caps font, it

remove .Tn abuse [was: yacc(1) mandoc nits]

On Aug 12 07:11:16, j...@kerhand.co.uk wrote: On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 10:49:27PM +0200, Jan Stary wrote: Tha yacc(1) manpage uses .Tn LALR(1) .Tn LR(1) I don't think LALR or LR is a tradename. This seems to be what mdoc(7) describes as: Since this macro is

rcs mandoc nits

This is small diff to the manpages in /usr/src/usr.bin/rcs What is the advantage of using '\*(Lt' instead of '' ? Is that advantage also valid for things like \*(Ltstdio.h\*(Gt ? All the other ''s and ''s are typed literally ... Jan Index: ci.1

yacc(1) mandoc nits

Tha yacc(1) manpage uses .Tn LALR(1) .Tn LR(1) I don't think LALR or LR is a tradename. This seems to be what mdoc(7) describes as: Since this macro is often implemented to use a small caps font, it has historically been used for acronyms (like ASCII) as

remove mandoc-skipped Pp and Ns

mandoc -Tlint reveals that some of the Pp and Ns are skipped anyway. Reword slightly to get rid of the parantheses that required the Ns in the first place. Index: libc/net/getrrsetbyname.3 === RCS file: /cvs/src/lib/libc/net

Re: remove mandoc-skipped Pp and Ns

On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 11:11:54AM +0200, Jan Stary wrote: mandoc -Tlint reveals that some of the Pp and Ns are skipped anyway. Reword slightly to get rid of the parantheses that required the Ns in the first place. fixed, thanks. i tweaked it a little. jmc Index: libc/net/getrrsetbyname.3

mandoc(1) spelling nit

s/legancy/legacy in mandoc(1) under Man Output. Chris

Re: mandoc(1) spelling nit

On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 10:51:46PM -0700, Chris Hettrick wrote: s/legancy/legacy in mandoc(1) under Man Output. Chris fixed in openbsd. thanks for the mail. jmc

Re: mandoc output to ascii - plaintext?

On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 02:01:43AM +0100, Kristaps Dzonsons wrote: I wanted to grep a pattern from a manpage and was very surprised I do not get normal plain text. $ mandoc /usr/local/man/man1/context.1 | cat -ntve | sed -n '123,124p' 123 -^H--^H-v^Hve^Her^Hrs^Hsi^Hio^Hon^Hn

mandoc output to ascii - plaintext?

Hello, I wanted to grep a pattern from a manpage and was very surprised I do not get normal plain text. $ mandoc /usr/local/man/man1/context.1 | cat -ntve | sed -n '123,124p' 123 -^H--^H-v^Hve^Her^Hrs^Hsi^Hio^Hon^Hn$ 124report installed context version

Re: mandoc output to ascii - plaintext?

Hi Jiri, Jiri B wrote on Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 06:50:24PM -0500: I wanted to grep a pattern from a manpage and was very surprised I do not get normal plain text. $ mandoc /usr/local/man/man1/context.1 | cat -ntve | sed -n '123,124p' 123 -^H--^H-v^Hve^Her^Hrs^Hsi^Hio^Hon^Hn

Mandoc Compiling Error

Hi Misc@, I'm trying to update one of my machine to latest current, while compiling mandoc(1) to follow http://www.openbsd.org/faq/current.html#20100403 instructions I got the following error. $ cd /usr/src/usr.bin/mandoc/ $ sudo make obj Password: Makefile, line 9: Malformed conditional

Re: Mandoc Compiling Error

...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Misc@, I'm trying to update one of my machine to latest current, while compiling mandoc(1) to follow http://www.openbsd.org/faq/current.html#20100403 instructions I got the following error. $ cd /usr/src/usr.bin/mandoc/ $ sudo make obj Password: Makefile, line 9: Malformed

Re: mandoc

I think we want to lock Kristaps in a room until he writes a C compiler. Nah, while Kristaps is in Stockholm, Northern Sweden provides *true* isolation: http://pcc.ludd.ltu.se/ Michael

Re: mandoc

On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 12:19:27AM -0400, Ted Unangst wrote: I just wanted to write a short note about mandoc. You may have seen it mentioned in some recent posts. It's a fantastic replacement for groff. How fantastic? This fantastic: mini:~/src/share/man/man9 time nroff -Tascii -mandoc

mandoc

I just wanted to write a short note about mandoc. You may have seen it mentioned in some recent posts. It's a fantastic replacement for groff. How fantastic? This fantastic: mini:~/src/share/man/man9 time nroff -Tascii -mandoc *.9 /dev/null 0m2.23s real 0m2.29s user 0m0.03s system

Re: mandoc

I just wanted to write a short note about mandoc. You may have seen it mentioned in some recent posts. It's a fantastic replacement for groff. How fantastic? This fantastic: mini:~/src/share/man/man9 time nroff -Tascii -mandoc *.9 /dev/null 0m2.23s real 0m2.29s user 0m0.03s

mandoc issue?

hi there, $ perldoc perllol (or man perllol) ... An array of an array is just a regular old array c...@aoa that you can get at with two subscripts, like CW$AoA[3][2]. Here's a declaration of the array: ... expected: An array of an array is just a regular old array

Re: mandoc issue?

hi there, $ perldoc perllol (or man perllol) ... An array of an array is just a regular old array c...@aoa that you can get at with two subscripts, like CW$AoA[3][2]. Here's a declaration of the array: ... expected: An array of an array is just a regular

Re: nroff -mandoc alternative

Kristaps DEonsons krist...@kth.se wrote: Hello, if anybody's interested in an alternative to groff for viewing BSD mdoc manual pages, I'm actively looking for patches and problem reports for mdocml. From the site http://mdocml.bsd.lv: Does this also handle man(7) or only mdoc(7)? --

Re: nroff -mandoc alternative

On Sun, Mar 01, 2009 at 03:22:33PM +, Christian Weisgerber wrote: Kristaps DEonsons krist...@kth.se wrote: Hello, if anybody's interested in an alternative to groff for viewing BSD mdoc manual pages, I'm actively looking for patches and problem reports for mdocml. From the site

nroff -mandoc alternative

Hello, if anybody's interested in an alternative to groff for viewing BSD mdoc manual pages, I'm actively looking for patches and problem reports for mdocml. From the site http://mdocml.bsd.lv: mdocml is a suite of tools compiling `mdoc', the roff macro package for BSD manual pages. The

Re: nroff -mandoc alternative

Matthew Szudzik wrote: Hello, if anybody's interested in an alternative to groff for viewing BSD mdoc manual pages, I'm actively looking for patches and problem reports for mdocml. From the site http://mdocml.bsd.lv: Excellent! Was this project started in response to the discussion about

Re: nroff -mandoc alternative

On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 11:01:49PM +0100, Kristaps D??onsons wrote: Hello, if anybody's interested in an alternative to groff for viewing BSD mdoc manual pages, I'm actively looking for patches and problem reports for mdocml. From the site http://mdocml.bsd.lv: Excellent! Was this project

Re: mandoc question

On 2006/10/01 at 06:05:24AM +0100, Jason McIntyre wrote: On Sun, Oct 01, 2006 at 12:41:40AM +0159, Han Boetes wrote: ~/nfs/manpage% grep '.*' *.log cvs.1.log:cvs.1:1732: warning: numeric expression expected (got `l') [ ... ] the cvs.1 will be from the gnu page, right? you

Re: mandoc question

Jason McIntyre wrote: but none of these are really issues for us - formatting is not affected, and the groff we use does not flag these as errors. OK, then I won't bother. # Han

mandoc question

Hi, I got this manpage which I am improving and I got this line spamprobe auto-train {SPAM|GOOD file ...} ... For which I used this code .It Nm spamprobe Cm auto-train Ar {SPAM|GOOD file ...} ... But that's ugly since there doesn't seem to be a macro that does curly braces. Is using

Re: mandoc question

On Sat, Sep 30, 2006 at 12:03:37PM +0159, Han Boetes wrote: Hi, I got this manpage which I am improving and I got this line spamprobe auto-train {SPAM|GOOD file ...} ... For which I used this code .It Nm spamprobe Cm auto-train Ar {SPAM|GOOD file ...} ... But that's ugly

Re: mandoc question

Jason McIntyre wrote: On Sat, Sep 30, 2006 at 12:03:37PM +0159, Han Boetes wrote: spamprobe auto-train {SPAM|GOOD file ...} ... I don't think there is a macro for curly braces. But for optional arguments you probably want .Op anyway: .It Xo .Nm spamprobe .Cm

Re: mandoc question

On Sat, Sep 30, 2006 at 05:10:37PM +0159, Han Boetes wrote: Jason McIntyre wrote: On Sat, Sep 30, 2006 at 12:03:37PM +0159, Han Boetes wrote: spamprobe auto-train {SPAM|GOOD file ...} ... It's not an optional argument. ``spamprobe auto-train SPAM foofile'' is ok, but ``spamprobe

Re: mandoc question

Jason McIntyre wrote: On Sat, Sep 30, 2006 at 05:10:37PM +0159, Han Boetes wrote: Jason McIntyre wrote: On Sat, Sep 30, 2006 at 12:03:37PM +0159, Han Boetes wrote: spamprobe auto-train {SPAM|GOOD file ...} ... It's not an optional argument. ``spamprobe auto-train SPAM

Re: mandoc question

On Sat, Sep 30, 2006 at 06:19:16PM +0200, Han Boetes wrote: That's what was in the original manpage, but I'm not looking to repeat it. I want to properly indicate that this is ok: spamprobe auto-train SPAM foofile spamprobe auto-train GOOD barfile spamprobe auto-train SPAM foofile GOOD

Re: mandoc question

Jason McIntyre wrote: personally i prefer to simplify things, and then document the missing bits. otherwise SYNOPSIS gets horrible. so for your example: Thank you for your insight. # Han

Re: mandoc question

Han Boetes wrote: Jason McIntyre wrote: personally i prefer to simplify things, and then document the missing bits. otherwise SYNOPSIS gets horrible. so for your example: Thank you for your insight. BTW on the Linux version of nroff I get this: ~% nroff -Tascii -mandoc nfs/spamprobe.1

Re: mandoc question

On Sat, Sep 30, 2006 at 08:35:52PM +0159, Han Boetes wrote: BTW on the Linux version of nroff I get this: ~% nroff -Tascii -mandoc nfs/spamprobe.1 /dev/null Usage: Ta must follow column entry: e.g. .It column_string [Ta [column_string ...]] (#473) Those are useful error

Re: mandoc question

On Sat, Sep 30, 2006 at 08:35:52PM +0159, Han Boetes wrote: Those are useful error messages, how do I enable them with OpenBSD nroff? i forgot to [EMAIL PROTECTED] has a nice perl script for checking man pages, mdoclint(1). it will run with very minimal modification on openbsd. it reports a

Re: mandoc question

Jason McIntyre wrote: On Sat, Sep 30, 2006 at 08:35:52PM +0159, Han Boetes wrote: BTW on the Linux version of nroff I get this: ~% nroff -Tascii -mandoc nfs/spamprobe.1 /dev/null Usage: Ta must follow column entry: e.g. .It column_string [Ta [column_string ...]] (#473

Re: mandoc question

On Sun, Oct 01, 2006 at 12:41:40AM +0159, Han Boetes wrote: ~/nfs/manpage% grep '.*' *.log cvs.1.log:cvs.1:1732: warning: numeric expression expected (got `l') intro.1.log:intro.1:33: you can only invoke a string or macro using \* klog.1.log:mdoc warning: A .Bl directive has no matching .El