Re: Running the grohtml pipeline as a pipeline

[Alejandro Colomar]

On Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 03:15:11PM -0500, G. Branden Robinson wrote:
> At 2024-03-22T20:56:28+0100, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> > I'm quite surprised that you aren't even getting the warning due to
> > `eqn -Thtml`.
> 
> I did.  I elided it.  I also elided nearly all of my garrulous shell
> prompt.  ;-)
> 
> > I was running
> > 
> >     $ troff --version
> >     GNU troff (groff) version 1.23.0.902-1fce7-dirty
> > 
> > But I can reproduce it with 1.23.0:
> 
> Well, let me see if I can...
> 
> Nope.  Still can't.

Heh, we're comparing different things.  I'm comparing `eqn -Tps` to
nothing at all, while you're comparing `eqn -Tps` to `eqn -Thtml`.  If I
diff the same things you're diffing, then I see the same as you.

        $ diff -u0 \
                <(/usr/bin/preconv man3/_Generic.3 \
                | /usr/bin/tbl \
                | /usr/bin/eqn -Tps \
                | /usr/bin/troff -man -Thtml -Wbreak \
                | /usr/bin/post-grohtml) \
                <(/usr/bin/preconv man3/_Generic.3 \
                | /usr/bin/tbl \
                | /usr/bin/eqn -Thtml \
                | /usr/bin/troff -man -Thtml -Wbreak \
                | /usr/bin/post-grohtml);
        warning: /usr/bin/eqn should have been given a '-Tps' option
        warning: (it is advisable to invoke groff via: groff -Thtml -e)
        $ echo $?
        0

Cheers,
Alex

-- 
<https://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>
Looking for a remote C programming job at the moment.

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature