Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.unix.programmer > #591 > unrolled thread
| Started by | David Mathog <dmathog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2011-05-17 12:09 -0700 |
| Last post | 2011-05-17 19:36 -0700 |
| Articles | 11 — 4 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.unix.programmer
man page syntax for multiple Bold lines with no spaces between them? David Mathog <dmathog@gmail.com> - 2011-05-17 12:09 -0700
Re: man page syntax for multiple Bold lines with no spaces between them? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2011-05-17 20:12 +0000
Re: man page syntax for multiple Bold lines with no spaces between them? David Mathog <dmathog@gmail.com> - 2011-05-17 13:22 -0700
Re: man page syntax for multiple Bold lines with no spaces between them? David Mathog <dmathog@gmail.com> - 2011-05-19 14:21 -0700
Re: man page syntax for multiple Bold lines with no spaces between them? loozadroog <mijoryx@yahoo.com> - 2011-05-19 22:30 -0700
Re: man page syntax for multiple Bold lines with no spaces between them? Geoff Clare <geoff@clare.See-My-Signature.invalid> - 2011-05-20 13:35 +0100
Re: man page syntax for multiple Bold lines with no spaces between them? David Mathog <dmathog@gmail.com> - 2011-05-20 08:55 -0700
Re: man page syntax for multiple Bold lines with no spaces between them? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2011-05-20 22:12 +0000
Re: man page syntax for multiple Bold lines with no spaces between them? loozadroog <mijoryx@yahoo.com> - 2011-05-17 14:50 -0700
Re: man page syntax for multiple Bold lines with no spaces between them? David Mathog <dmathog@gmail.com> - 2011-05-17 15:32 -0700
Re: man page syntax for multiple Bold lines with no spaces between them? loozadroog <mijoryx@yahoo.com> - 2011-05-17 19:36 -0700
| From | David Mathog <dmathog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-05-17 12:09 -0700 |
| Subject | man page syntax for multiple Bold lines with no spaces between them? |
| Message-ID | <d7400684-a1a9-40fc-8128-74494b241242@k3g2000prl.googlegroups.com> |
What is the syntax to use in a man page to achieve a format exactly
like this with no blank lines
added anywhere?
BOLD TEXT1
BOLD TEXT2
BOLD TEXT3
roman text
This method
.B BOLD TEXT1
.B BOLD TEXT2
.B BOLD TEXT3
puts an extra line between each pair of bold lines.
Thanks,
David Mathog
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-05-17 20:12 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <sEAAp.9364$716.6717@news.usenetserver.com> |
| In reply to | #591 |
David Mathog <dmathog@gmail.com> writes: >What is the syntax to use in a man page to achieve a format exactly >like this with no blank lines >added anywhere? > > BOLD TEXT1 > BOLD TEXT2 > BOLD TEXT3 > roman text > >This method > >.B BOLD TEXT1 >.B BOLD TEXT2 >.B BOLD TEXT3 > >puts an extra line between each pair of bold lines. > >Thanks, > >David Mathog \fBBoldText\fP \fIItalicText\fP \f(CWConstant-Width Text\fP is the inline troff for emphasis. scott
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Mathog <dmathog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-05-17 13:22 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <2652e661-2091-4a5b-9e75-53a6756a535f@r33g2000prh.googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #593 |
On May 17, 1:12 pm, sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote: > \fBBoldText\fP \fIItalicText\fP \f(CWConstant-Width Text\fP Thanks, that works like a charm. David
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Mathog <dmathog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-05-19 14:21 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <652a518e-ed09-4dc9-b493-80b57773238c@k15g2000pri.googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #593 |
On May 17, 1:12 pm, sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote: > > \fBBoldText\fP \fIItalicText\fP \f(CWConstant-Width Text\fP The string \fBBold \fIItalic \fPNormal Shows text Bold (in bold) Italic (in italic) Normal (in normal) in my testing. That's fine, but is it always like that? I could not find the relevant documentation to see what these escape sequences do exactly. Is it OK to use it as above, or should it be more HTML like, with a close for each statement, like this: \fBBold \fP\fIItalic \fPblah ? Thanks, David
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | loozadroog <mijoryx@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-05-19 22:30 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f5b928fe-bd1b-46a2-878e-cde737aeb3cb@j2g2000yqb.googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #622 |
On May 19, 4:21 pm, David Mathog <dmat...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 17, 1:12 pm, sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote:
>
>
>
> > \fBBoldText\fP \fIItalicText\fP \f(CWConstant-Width Text\fP
>
> The string
>
> \fBBold \fIItalic \fPNormal
>
> Shows text
> Bold (in bold) Italic (in italic) Normal (in normal)
>
> in my testing. That's fine, but is it always like that?
> I could not find the relevant documentation to see what these
> escape sequences do exactly.
>
> Is it OK to use it as above, or should it be more HTML like, with
> a close for each statement, like this:
>
> \fBBold \fP\fIItalic \fPblah
>
> ?
>
> Thanks,
>
> David
At the risk of again putting foot in mouth, I think the \escapes are
general troff features and not part of the man macros per se.
I don't think troff much cares whether you switch to roman before
switching to italic. It's probably "less efficient" by some trivial
amount.
Go with whatever makes the source more readable.
ldroog
ps.
According to man(7), font changes like .B do this:
If no arguments are given, the command is applied to the
following line of text.
So this should work:
.B
BOLD TEXT1
.br
.B
BOLD TEXT2
.br
.B
BOLD TEXT3
.br
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Geoff Clare <geoff@clare.See-My-Signature.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-05-20 13:35 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <5q3ia8-ml9.ln1@leafnode-msgid.gclare.org.uk> |
| In reply to | #622 |
David Mathog wrote: > On May 17, 1:12 pm, sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote: >> >> \fBBoldText\fP \fIItalicText\fP \f(CWConstant-Width Text\fP > > The string > > \fBBold \fIItalic \fPNormal > > Shows text > Bold (in bold) Italic (in italic) Normal (in normal) > > in my testing. Really? It should show "Normal" in bold. The \fP means revert to the previous font, and the font that was previously in effect (i.e. before the \fI) was bold. > Is it OK to use it as above, or should it be more HTML like, with > a close for each statement, like this: > > \fBBold \fP\fIItalic \fPblah It would be more usual to use: \fBBold\fP \fIItalic\fP blah -- Geoff Clare <netnews@gclare.org.uk>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Mathog <dmathog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-05-20 08:55 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <d545a697-d21c-4e70-a0f0-242cce1e1095@s41g2000prb.googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #629 |
On May 20, 5:35 am, Geoff Clare <ge...@clare.See-My-Signature.invalid> wrote: > David Mathog wrote: > > On May 17, 1:12 pm, sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote: > > >> \fBBoldText\fP \fIItalicText\fP \f(CWConstant-Width Text\fP > > > The string > > > \fBBold \fIItalic \fPNormal > > > Shows text > > Bold (in bold) Italic (in italic) Normal (in normal) > > > in my testing. > > Really? It should show "Normal" in bold. I ran that test by checking output from ManServer 1.07. There are a few inconsistencies between man and manserver, so I just went back and tested it directly with man and the two were different. The former reverts to normal after the \fP, the latter goes to bold. So I guess the answer is to stick with \fBxxxx\fP\fIyyyy\fP Interestingly this string: normal \fBBold \fIItalic \fPnormal1 \fPnormal2 \fPnormal3 \fPnormal4 \fPnormal5 shows alternating bold and italic (as underlines) in man. So \fP picks up "last" only one level deep, where ManServer shows fonts normal bold italic normal normal normal normal normal which is, well, no levels deep, with \fP returning directly to Normal. Thanks, David
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-05-20 22:12 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <HHBBp.2298$Ah2.2093@news.usenetserver.com> |
| In reply to | #631 |
David Mathog <dmathog@gmail.com> writes: >On May 20, 5:35=A0am, Geoff Clare <ge...@clare.See-My-Signature.invalid> >wrote: >> David Mathog wrote: >> > On May 17, 1:12=A0pm, sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote: >> >> >> \fBBoldText\fP =A0\fIItalicText\fP =A0\f(CWConstant-Width Text\fP >> >> > The string >> >> > \fBBold \fIItalic \fPNormal >> >> > Shows text >> > =A0 Bold (in bold) Italic (in italic) Normal (in normal) >> >> > in my testing. >> >> Really? =A0It should show "Normal" in bold. > >I ran that test by checking output from ManServer 1.07. There are a >few inconsistencies between man and manserver, so I just went back and >tested it directly with man and the two were different. The former >reverts to normal after the \fP, the latter goes to bold. So I guess >the answer is to stick with > > \fBxxxx\fP\fIyyyy\fP > >Interestingly this string: > >normal \fBBold \fIItalic \fPnormal1 \fPnormal2 \fPnormal3 \fPnormal4 >\fPnormal5 > >shows alternating bold and italic (as underlines) in man. So \fP >picks up "last" only one level deep, where ManServer shows fonts nroff(1) which is used by the man(1) command to format the manual page will use overstriking for bold fonts and will understrike italics (see nroff/troff technical discussion, section 2.2 in Documenters Workbench Technical Discussion). You can always use (on linux, YMMV): troff -man manual-page-source | ps2pdf - manpage.pdf or tbl manual-page-source-with-tables | troff -man | ps2pdf - manpage.pdf Then use xpdf, acroread or evince to examine the typeset manpage. The documentation doesn't explicitly discuss the depth of the \fP stack, but the implication is that it is only one level deep (and in the hundreds of troff documents I've written over the last 30 years, I've never assumed that \fP nests). scott
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | loozadroog <mijoryx@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-05-17 14:50 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c1338231-cf01-4431-95a9-b00311f99235@d1g2000yqm.googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #591 |
On May 17, 2:09 pm, David Mathog <dmat...@gmail.com> wrote: > What is the syntax to use in a man page to achieve a format exactly > like this with no blank lines > added anywhere? > > BOLD TEXT1 > BOLD TEXT2 > BOLD TEXT3 > roman text > > This method > > .B BOLD TEXT1 > .B BOLD TEXT2 > .B BOLD TEXT3 > > puts an extra line between each pair of bold lines. > > Thanks, > > David Mathog I think if you use .B without an argument, it switches to boldface until you switch to something else. .B BOLD TEXT1 .br BOLD TEXT2 .br BOLD TEXT3 .br .R
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Mathog <dmathog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-05-17 15:32 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <a1496ecf-4e66-440e-903d-a3f8b8ddd08e@r35g2000prj.googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #596 |
On May 17, 2:50 pm, loozadroog <mijo...@yahoo.com> wrote: > I think if you use .B without an argument, it switches to boldface > until you switch to something else. > > .B > BOLD TEXT1 > .br > BOLD TEXT2 > .br > BOLD TEXT3 > .br > .R That didn't work for me, all three lines were regular text. Thanks, David
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | loozadroog <mijoryx@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-05-17 19:36 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <cf8136fe-2abd-47ee-bdcb-71944d5e3be0@n10g2000yqf.googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #600 |
On May 17, 5:32 pm, David Mathog <dmat...@gmail.com> wrote: > On May 17, 2:50 pm, loozadroog <mijo...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > I think if you use .B without an argument, it switches to boldface > > until you switch to something else. > > > .B > > BOLD TEXT1 > > .br > > BOLD TEXT2 > > .br > > BOLD TEXT3 > > .br > > .R > > That didn't work for me, all three lines were regular text. > > Thanks, > > David Sorry. I was looking at mm macros, not man. :(
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | comp.unix.programmer
csiph-web