Re: [Groff] new groff prerelease

[Keith Marshall]

On Saturday 28 May 2005 8:14 am, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
>
> BTW, there is another serious problem while compiling pdfmark.pdf:
>
>   ./pdfroff: : cannot execute
>   ./pdfroff: --style: not found
>
> This happens on various platforms which Nelson has tested.  I'm
> waiting for the config.log files to get more information.

To help me debug this, please cd to the contrib/pdfmark build directory, and 
generate a log file ...

        touch  foo  bar
        sh  -vx  pdfroff  --style=foo  bar  >  /dev/null  2> pdfroff.log

> > 2) With a successful build, in /home/keith/test, the generated pathname
> >    of the pdfmark.ms source file is too long for groff to fit it within
> >    the margins of the PDF output page.  [...]
>
> Use `\:' after the directory separators to split it into smaller
> pieces

Well, at present I get it as the expansion of \n(.F, but I guess I can do 
something clever, with a substitution of ${exampledir}, in Makefile.sub :-)

> >    I guess we should install this document source in some example
> >    directory, and fix up the reference appropriately, for use in the
> >    generated PDF document.  Do you have any preference as to where
> >    that should be?
>
> $(EXAMPLEFILES).

By this, I presume you mean to replicate the setup in doc/Makefile.sub, so it 
ends up in ${exampledir}?

BTW, in contrib/mom/Makefile.sub I see ...

   install_data: $(NORMALFILES) $(HTMLDOCFILES) \
        $(EXAMPLEFILES) $(PROCESSEDEXAMPLEFILES)
        ...
        for f in $(EXAMPLEFILES); do \
          rm -f $(exampledir)/$$f; \
          $(INSTALL_DATA) $(srcdir)/$$f $(docdir)/$$f; \
        done
        for f in $(PROCESSEDEXAMPLEFILES); do \
          rm -f $(exampledir)/$$f; \
          $(INSTALL_DATA) $$f $(docdir)/$$f; \
        done

Is this correct?  Should these two file groups not also install to 
${exampledir}, as in doc/Makefile.sub?

Best regards,
Keith.