NetBSD Problem Report #58807

From www@netbsd.org  Sun Nov  3 07:39:37 2024
Return-Path: <www@netbsd.org>
Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [199.233.217.200])
	(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
	 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256
	 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256)
	(Client CN "mail.NetBSD.org", Issuer "mail.NetBSD.org CA" (not verified))
	by mollari.NetBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1315A1A9238
	for <gnats-bugs@gnats.NetBSD.org>; Sun,  3 Nov 2024 07:39:37 +0000 (UTC)
Message-Id: <20241103073935.C82A71A923B@mollari.NetBSD.org>
Date: Sun,  3 Nov 2024 07:39:35 +0000 (UTC)
From: cryintothebluesky@gmail.com
Reply-To: cryintothebluesky@gmail.com
To: gnats-bugs@NetBSD.org
Subject: Formatting issues for NetBSD online libX11 man pages
X-Send-Pr-Version: www-1.0

>Number:         58807
>Category:       misc
>Synopsis:       Formatting issues for NetBSD online libX11 man pages
>Confidential:   no
>Severity:       non-critical
>Priority:       medium
>Responsible:    misc-bug-people
>State:          open
>Class:          doc-bug
>Submitter-Id:   net
>Arrival-Date:   Sun Nov 03 07:40:00 +0000 2024
>Last-Modified:  Mon Nov 04 22:00:02 +0000 2024
>Originator:     Sad Clouds
>Release:        
>Organization:
>Environment:
>Description:
Some of the online man pages related to libX11 seem to be
incorrectly formatted, making them hard to read. For example,
XCreateGC(3) man page: https://man.netbsd.org/XCreateGC.3

Contrast this with OpenBSD: https://man.openbsd.org/XCreateGC

The actual NetBSD man pages seem to be OK when viewed via man(1), it's
just the formatting for online HTML files seems a bit buggy.
>How-To-Repeat:

>Fix:

>Audit-Trail:
From: matthew green <mrg@eterna23.net>
To: gnats-bugs@netbsd.org, kim@netbsd.org
Cc: misc-bug-people@netbsd.org, gnats-admin@netbsd.org,
    netbsd-bugs@netbsd.org
Subject: re: misc/58807: Formatting issues for NetBSD online libX11 man pages
Date: Sun, 03 Nov 2024 18:54:35 +1100

 seems that this is a groff bug.  i can see the problem using eg:

    groff -Tlatin1 -mdoc2html /usr/X11R7/man/man3/XCreateGC.3 > /tmp/XCreat=
 eGC.html

 but this seems to format fine to me:

    mandoc -T html /usr/X11R7/man/man3/XCreateGC.3 > /tmp/XCreateGC.html


 .mrg.

From: Valery Ushakov <uwe@stderr.spb.ru>
To: gnats-bugs@netbsd.org
Cc: 
Subject: Re: misc/58807: Formatting issues for NetBSD online libX11 man pages
Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2024 12:05:37 +0300

 On Sun, Nov 03, 2024 at 07:55:01 +0000, matthew green via gnats wrote:

 >  seems that this is a groff bug.  i can see the problem using eg:
 >
 >     groff -Tlatin1 -mdoc2html /usr/X11R7/man/man3/XCreateGC.3 > /tmp/XCreat=
 >  eGC.html

 If you are using groff to format this, you need to manually arrange
 for tbl preprocessor to be called on the file first.  Doesn't seem to
 help too much as groff then spews

   warning: page 65: table text block will not fit on one page
   ...

 -uwe

From: Kimmo Suominen <kim@netbsd.org>
To: gnats-bugs@netbsd.org
Cc: 
Subject: Re: misc/58807: Formatting issues for NetBSD online libX11 man pages
Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2024 10:26:01 +0200

 Hi all,

 The /usr/X11R7/man/man3/XCreateGC.3 file begins with

     '\" t

 This means the page should be passed through tbl(1).  Which tool is
 responsible for recognizing that: man(1) or groff(1)?  It does not look
 like the latter recognizes it.

 Also looks like mandoc fails to format /usr/share/man/man1/groff.1
 correctly.  The lists of options is all messed up with mandoc:

     mandoc /usr/share/man/man1/groff.1 | less
     groff -Tascii -mandoc /usr/share/man/man1/groff.1 | less

 Kind regards,
 + Kimmo

From: Valery Ushakov <uwe@stderr.spb.ru>
To: gnats-bugs@netbsd.org
Cc: 
Subject: Re: misc/58807: Formatting issues for NetBSD online libX11 man pages
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2024 00:59:44 +0300

 On Mon, Nov 04, 2024 at 08:30:03 +0000, Kimmo Suominen via gnats wrote:

 >     '\" t
 >
 > This means the page should be passed through tbl(1).  Which tool is
 > responsible for recognizing that: man(1) or groff(1)?

 It's man(1)'s convention supported by some versions of man (I forgot
 which).  I think bsd man doesn't do that.


 > Also looks like mandoc fails to format /usr/share/man/man1/groff.1
 > correctly.

 mandoc groks some basic troff, but not a lot of it, so it fails to
 format most of the groff man pages (groff_char, etc).


 -uwe

Home	PR Database Search