From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from scc-mailout.scc.kit.edu (scc-mailout.scc.kit.edu [129.13.185.201]) by krisdoz.my.domain (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p6663Yg6022145 for ; Wed, 6 Jul 2011 02:03:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from hekate.usta.de (asta-nat.asta.uni-karlsruhe.de [172.22.63.82]) by scc-mailout-01 with esmtp (Exim 4.72 #1) id 1QeLCu-0002WK-PH; Wed, 06 Jul 2011 08:03:32 +0200 Received: from donnerwolke.usta.de ([172.24.96.3]) by hekate.usta.de with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QeLCu-0004Zb-O0 for tech@mdocml.bsd.lv; Wed, 06 Jul 2011 08:03:32 +0200 Received: from iris.usta.de ([172.24.96.5] helo=usta.de) by donnerwolke.usta.de with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QeLCu-00058a-NN for tech@mdocml.bsd.lv; Wed, 06 Jul 2011 08:03:32 +0200 Received: from schwarze by usta.de with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QeLCu-0000U1-Ml for tech@mdocml.bsd.lv; Wed, 06 Jul 2011 08:03:32 +0200 Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2011 08:03:32 +0200 From: Ingo Schwarze To: tech@mdocml.bsd.lv Subject: Re: sync results Message-ID: <20110706060332.GB29041@iris.usta.de> References: <20110704224519.GC28684@iris.usta.de> <4E1306FA.3070801@bsd.lv> X-Mailinglist: mdocml-tech Reply-To: tech@mdocml.bsd.lv MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4E1306FA.3070801@bsd.lv> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Hi Kristaps, Kristaps Dzonsons wrote on Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 02:43:38PM +0200: > Ingo Schwarze wrote: > I'm not able to reproduce some of these. >>i'm currently syncing from bsd.lv to openbsd.org. >>The code looks good, and in the output, i see many improvements, >>so i will now commit the sync. >> >> >>However, there are also a three tiny regressions: >> >>cvs(1) contains this code: >> >>.TP 1i >>\fB?\fP \fIfile\fP >>\fIfile\fP is in your working directory, but does not correspond to >>anything in the source repository, and is not in the list of files >>for \fBcvs\fP to ignore (see the description of the \fB\-I\fP option). >>.PP >>.RS .5i >>.sp >>Use the >>.B \-A >>option to reset any sticky tags, dates, or >>.B \-k >>options. (If you get a working copy of a file by using one of the >> >>Now doubtless, .PP .RS .sp in a row is horrible. >>However, with groff and old mandoc, that gave one blank line. >>Now there are two. > This is not the case with my machine (groff 1.19.2). > > The following: > > .TH FOO 1 > .SH NAME > foo - bar > .SH DESCRIPTION > hi. > .PP > .RS .5i > .sp > Use the > > Has two spaces between the "hi" and "Use the" with both groff and > mandoc (using nroff -mandoc and groff -Tascii -mandoc). That looks like a bug in groff-1.19 that has been fixed in 1.21. With groff-1.21 and your test code, i get one blank line between "hi" and "Use the", which makes more sense given the general tendency of roff to compress multiple blank lines to one. >> lynx(1) contains this code: >> >> .TP >> .B \-cookie_file\fR=\fIFILENAME >> specifies a file to use to read cookies. >> >> In groff and old mandoc, the indent of "specifies" relative to "-cookie" >> was 7, now it is 5. > Are you sure? I just ran this code and had both mandoc and groff > align "specifies" under the underscore, i.e., 7 spaces. Yes, with both OpenBSD and bsd.lv mandoc, i get the "specifies" aligned under the "i" in "-cookie_file". I'm just noticing that the change in alignment happens about two dozen lines above, below "-cmd_script". The "comment beginning with..." is still aligned at 7 (below the 'r'), the "exit" is aligned at 5 (below the 's'). Yours, Ingo -- To unsubscribe send an email to tech+unsubscribe@mdocml.bsd.lv