On Wed, Jun 05, 2013 at 06:36:11PM +0200, Jan Klemkow wrote:
>
> The only special case is this one:
>
> Index: libc/sys/quotactl.2
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/src/lib/libc/sys/quotactl.2,v
> retrieving revision 1.11
> diff -u -p -r1.11 quotactl.2
> --- libc/sys/quotactl.2 31 May 2007 19:19:33 -0000 1.11
> +++ libc/sys/quotactl.2 5 Jun 2013 16:25:27 -0000
> @@ -40,8 +40,8 @@
> .Nm quotactl
> .Nd manipulate filesystem quotas
> .Sh SYNOPSIS
> -.Fd #include <ufs/ufs/quota.h> /* for ufs quotas */
> -.Fd #include <unistd.h>
> +.In ufs/ufs/quota.h /* for ufs quotas */
> +.In unistd.h
> .Ft int
> .Fn quotactl "const char *path" "int cmd" "int id" "char *addr"
> .Sh DESCRIPTION
>
> I had to replace the tab between 'quota.h' and the comment with a normal
> space. mandoc(1) do not render it properly with a tabulator.
>
we should be careful here. mandoc renders it like this:
SYNOPSIS
#include <ufs/ufs/quota.h> /* for ufs quotas */
#include <unistd.h>
whereas groff does this:
SYNOPSIS
#include <ufs/ufs/quota.h>
/* for ufs quotas */ #include <unistd.h>
our mdoc(7) states that .In should have exactly one argument. i don;t
think groff says the same, but it does document (groff_mdoc(7)) that .In
causes a newline after its argument.
we should probably not have more than one argument in our pages for the
.In lines, and, arguably, mandoc should behave the same as groff.
ingo?
jmc
