Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 07:50:02 -0700 (PDT) From: Ian Dowse <iedowse@maths.tcd.ie> To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: bin/29247: fmt should not expand tabs. Message-ID: <200108061450.f76Eo2O35695@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The following reply was made to PR bin/29247; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Ian Dowse <iedowse@maths.tcd.ie> To: Ruslan Ermilov <ru@FreeBSD.org> Cc: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: bin/29247: fmt should not expand tabs. Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2001 15:40:35 +0100 In message <20010806170033.A44549@sunbay.com>, Ruslan Ermilov writes: >Ah, that. That could be achieved by `fmt -l 8'. Don't take it wrong! >fmt(1) always replaces spaces by tabs first. The old fmt(1) then did >what new `-l 8' currently does, unconditionally, i.e., replaces every >8 leading spaces by a single tab character. Ok, I didn't understand fully why it worked, but a "!}fmt" in vi has always left a tab-indented paragraph with tabs in the indentation, and now it doesn't. This is the only way I ever use fmt, so the new behaviour is quite annoying, and I don't think I'll just get used to typing "!}fmt -l 8" instead :-). I agree that the old behaviour was not an ideal way to achieve the effect of keeping tab indents, but the outcome for me was the same as if it had not expanded the tabs in the first place. I think that to avoid this unwanted change in behaviour, either fmt needs to remember whether the indentation used tabs, or it should default to -l 8... >> It also deals differently with the 'f' after the long line, but that's >> probably unimportant. >> >Yes, this is due to the: > >: -p Allow indented paragraphs. That's fine. It's an improvement on the old behaviour. Ian To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-bugs" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200108061450.f76Eo2O35695>