Re: groff .ft command use in asciidoc

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Nov 19, 2010, 18:37 UTC
Message-ID: <20101119183753.GA14189@sigill.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <20101119182230.GA26187@burratino>

On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 12:22:30PM -0600, Jonathan Nieder wrote:

Show 15 quoted lines

> Jeff King wrote:
> 
> > --- a/Documentation/Makefile
> > +++ b/Documentation/Makefile
> > @@ -63,35 +63,28 @@ endif
> [...]
> > -#	-1.68.1,	set ASCIIDOC_NO_ROFF? (based on changelog from 1.73.0)
> > -#	1.69.0,		no extra settings are needed?
> > +#	-1.68.1,	no extra settings are needed?
> > +#	1.69.0,		set ASCIIDOC_ROFF?
> >  #	1.69.1-1.71.0,	set DOCBOOK_SUPPRESS_SP?
> > -#	1.71.1,		no extra settings are needed?
> > +#	1.71.1,		set ASCIIDOC_ROFF?
> 
> I would like to see these question marks go away.

I would, too, but not enough to put work into building and testing various combinations of software that hopefully nobody is using anymore.

Show 5 quoted lines

> I believe the
> initial introduction of ASCIIDOC_NO_ROFF happened conservatively:
> i.e., do not change anything unless this particular toolset
> requires the change.  Which is a shame, because it means it is not
> obvious what ASCIIDOC_ROFF is working around.

Yeah, the name ASCIIDOC_ROFF is kind of awful. I tried to make this patch as dirt-simple as possible: just switch the defaults around (it would be nice if we could simply set ASCIIDOC8=Yes, but because we use "ifdef" and not "if" in the makefile, it has to be a separate variable).

I suspect there could really be some cleanup in this area, and you seem to, too...

Show 8 quoted lines

> Given all that, I suspect (but haven't checked) that the only knob we
> would need to cover all historically supported versions of DocBook is
> 
> 	DOCBOOK_MESSES_UP_SCREEN_TAG = YesUnfortunately
> 
> to be set with docbook versions in the 1.68 series.  Everyone else
> can use <screen>, with the <literallayout> fixup to add some space
> after it.

Yeah, that would be great and much simpler if it works. I encourage you to test it. :)

> > However, I think it is worth it to avoid the hassle for the vast
> > majority of people on modern systems.
> 
> Yes!  Your patch takes care of that, so ack.

Thanks.

-Peff