Date: Sat, 06 Feb 1999 16:25:44 +0900 From: Kazutaka YOKOTA <yokota@zodiac.mech.utsunomiya-u.ac.jp> To: Bill Fenner <fenner@parc.xerox.com> Cc: Wolfram Schneider <wosch@cs.tu-berlin.de>, bugs@FreeBSD.ORG, yokota@zodiac.mech.utsunomiya-u.ac.jp Subject: Fx and Os macros (was: Re: [yokota@zodiac.mech.utsunomiya-u.ac.jp: .Fx and .Os macros in groff, FreeBSD]) Message-ID: <199902060725.QAA07495@zodiac.mech.utsunomiya-u.ac.jp> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 05 Feb 1999 20:05:59 PST." <199902060405.UAA20537@mango.parc.xerox.com> References: <199902060405.UAA20537@mango.parc.xerox.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>No need to ignore it; it's easy to implement:
>
>.ie "\\$1"2" \&\\*(tNFreeBSD\\*(aa 2.0\\$2
>.el \&\\*(tNFreeBSD\\*(aa \\$1\\$2
>
>>Then, how should Os macro, in doc-common, be fixed? I am no
>>nroff/groff expert. Does the following snippet look OK?
>
>We can special-case the value 2 here too;
>
>.if "\\$1"FreeBSD" \{\
>. ie "\\$2"2" .ds oS FreeBSD 2.0
>. el .ds oS FreeBSD \\$2
>.\}
>
>>We should fix these macros in time for 3.1-RELEASE. Would you do it,
>>or shall I?
>
>Well, I'd like to see if there's anyone who knows why the macros
>were the way they were ("because nobody really knew *roff" is a
>likely answer) and if there's a reason not to make this kind of
>change...
I see wosch, pst, and mpp touched these macros from time to time,
according to cvs logs. They may know something.
Kazu
yokota@FreeBSD.ORG
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?199902060725.QAA07495>