From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17255 invoked by alias); 10 Aug 2006 22:26:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 17247 invoked by uid 22791); 10 Aug 2006 22:26:15 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from main.gmane.org (HELO ciao.gmane.org) (80.91.229.2) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 10 Aug 2006 22:26:10 +0000 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1GBIyV-0007A7-V0 for cygwin-talk@cygwin.com; Fri, 11 Aug 2006 00:25:59 +0200 Received: from 65.207.213.226 ([65.207.213.226]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 11 Aug 2006 00:25:59 +0200 Received: from mwoehlke by 65.207.213.226 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 11 Aug 2006 00:25:59 +0200 To: cygwin-talk@cygwin.com From: mwoehlke Subject: What's wrong with *roff, anyway? (Was: Um... what format are Cygwin manpages?) Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 22:26:00 -0000 Message-ID: References: <20060810202721.GC935@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> <20060810205421.GG935@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> <20060810213052.GB11554@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.0.5) Gecko/20060719 Thunderbird/1.5.0.5 Mnenhy/0.7.4.0 In-Reply-To: <20060810213052.GB11554@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-talk-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-talk-owner@cygwin.com Reply-To: The Cygwin-Talk Maiming List X-SW-Source: 2006-q3/txt/msg00142.txt.bz2 Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 04:21:13PM -0500, mwoehlke wrote: >> Christopher Faylor wrote: >>> On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 03:41:12PM -0500, mwoehlke wrote: >>>> Christopher Faylor wrote: >>>>> On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 03:20:21PM -0500, mwoehlke wrote: >>>>>> Anyway, if it turns out I have to patch an info file, then I guess I'm >>>>>> stuck doing that. Assuming anyone on newlib pays attention to me. So >>>>>> far, zilch. >>>>> Yes, you definitely have to *patch* the *source* of the documentation >>>>> that >>>>> you want changed if you want someone to apply it. >>>> I think the point is that I would hope they would accept a flat-out new >>>> file, if it was that major a re-working (which IMO it should be; I find >>>> the layout of glibc's manpage a lot easier to understand, in addition to >>>> being more accurate). >>>> >>>> But... if I'm to do anything with the texinfo source, I have to *find* >>>> it first. Sigh. I am losing enthusiasm for this project. >>> Come on, mwoehlke, you know the drill by now. It isn't that hard to >>> find the source and you don't get to choose your own method for >>> providing patches. It's pretty standard to supply patches against >>> source code. >>> >>> I imagine that the source code in question is in libc.info. The web site >>> for newlib is http://sourceware.org/newlib/ . >> I do. You misunderstood :-). (Then again, I didn't specify what I'd >> done, did I? Shame on me :-).) >> >> What I meant to say was that I went and poked around the web CVS >> interface at http://sourceware.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/?cvsroot=src >> and *still* couldn't find it. And... having gone and poked around >> further, I think you meant "sprintf.def". Whew, for a while I was afraid >> I was going to have to syn the whole *tree* and use 'find'. :-) >> >> Now... where is "sprintf.def"? :-) >> (Don't worry, I'm still looking for it.) > > Actually, on some further digging it is, most likely, in sprintf.c > So, no texinfo editing required. Hey! Now I found that /all//by//myself/, thank you! ;-) (See, I told you I'd keep looking.) And... now I understand why the ->nroff converter works so poorly. Eek. Do you really do the indentation and line length *by hand*, or am I missing something? -- Matthew vIMprove your life! Now on version 7!