From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from kerhand.co.uk (_smtpd@82-69-137-214.dsl.in-addr.zen.co.uk [82.69.137.214]) by krisdoz.my.domain (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o8PFZRTQ021583 for ; Sat, 25 Sep 2010 11:35:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (1000@localhost [IPv6:::1]) by kerhand.co.uk (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id wNs8GVGi for ; Sat, 25 Sep 2010 16:35:01 +0100 (BST) Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2010 16:35:01 +0100 From: Jason McIntyre To: discuss@mdocml.bsd.lv Subject: Re: .Fn _* issue Message-ID: <20100925153525.GD25298@bramka.kerhand.co.uk> References: <20100925063547.GB14869@bramka.kerhand.co.uk> <4C9E13FE.2010001@bsd.lv> X-Mailinglist: mdocml-discuss Reply-To: discuss@mdocml.bsd.lv Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4C9E13FE.2010001@bsd.lv> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 05:23:42PM +0200, Kristaps Dzonsons wrote: > > so the issue is the initial `_' in _flush_cache. it's formatted in a > > different font to the rest of the function name (you can see this best > > on a terminal). > > > > this is a long standing bug that we always had in old groff, which > > really annoyed me. new groff fixed it. > > Jason, I'm not sure I follow as mandoc, new groff, and old groff all > seem to do the same thing with the _flush_cache beginning: > > GNU nroff (groff) version 1.18.1 > nroff -mandoc foo.1 | hexdump -c > _ \b _ f \b f l \b l u \b > > mandoc foo.1 | hexdump -c > _ \b _ f \b f l \b l u \b > > GNU troff version 1.15 > nroff -mandoc foo.1 | hexdump -c > _ \b _ f \b f l \b l u \b > > hmm, and you do not see the issue i describe? what else could it be? surely not my TERM setting if mandoc shows it one way and groff another. what else? jmc -- To unsubscribe send an email to discuss+unsubscribe@mdocml.bsd.lv