[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [BUG] "\fC" macro in ox-man.el [9.6.15 (release_9.6.15 @ /usr/share/
From: |
Xiyue Deng |
Subject: |
Re: [BUG] "\fC" macro in ox-man.el [9.6.15 (release_9.6.15 @ /usr/share/emacs/29.2/lisp/org/)] |
Date: |
Mon, 11 Mar 2024 17:06:17 -0700 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) |
Hi Ihor,
Ihor Radchenko <yantar92@posteo.net> writes:
> Xiyue Deng <manphiz@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> (This was first reported to Emacs at
>> https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=69483)
>>
>> "mu4e"[1] (a popular Emacs mail client) uses Org to generate its
>> manpages. However, the generated output contains macros that are not
>> understood by groff. After some debugging, Jeremy traced this back to
>> the macro "\fC" used in ox-man.el[2]. Git history shows that this may
>> have been there since the beginning. We tried to find a documentation
>> for the "\fC" macro but has not been able to find one. Jeremy suggests
>> that "C" may be an old alias for Courier, and if that's the case it
>> should be changed to "\f[CR]". Would be great if Org people can
>> confirm.
>
> This is not an unknown problem. AFAIU, the \fC macro is widely used for
> troff, although it is not supported by groff. Check out the ongoing
> discussion at https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1049968#15
>
> They suggest the following instead of \fC:
>
> The best solution known to me is to use an extension to the man(7)
> language. It first appeared in Ninth Edition Unix (1986) and was
> adopted by a groff release in 2009. That is the `EX`/`EE` macro pair,
> which sets a monospaced display. (In other words, filling is disabled
> and a monospaced font selected if necessary.)
I'm not very familiar with roff so my understanding may be off.
According to the `Safe subset' section in man(7), they mentioned the
following:
,----
| Font changes (ft and the \f escape sequence) should only have the
| values 1, 2, 3, 4, R, I, B, P, or CW (the ft command may also have no
| parameters).
`----
Does it mean `\fC' should be replaced by `\f[CW]'?
Also CCing Jeremy who may have a better idea on how this should be
handled.
--
Xiyue Deng