[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#450432: ... and even more bugs like this?



>>>>> Colin Watson <cjwatson@debian.org> writes:

[...]

 >> W: libdirectfb-dev: manpage-has-errors-from-man usr/share/man/man1/directfb-config.1.gz 24: warning: `l' not defined
 >> W: dvidvi: manpage-has-errors-from-man usr/share/man/man1/a5booklet.1.gz 9: warning: `IX' not defined

 >> The lines like this seems to me somewhat bogus.  I guess, `.IX'
 >> allows one to specify an index item, and since `man' doesn't provide
 >> any indices, this macro is left undefined, and thus ignored by `man'
 >> (and it's okay.)

 > Perhaps some of these should be explicitly ignored by lintian, as
 > they're problems with popular generator tools and it really doesn't
 > do anyone any good to report them in lintian; they should be filed as
 > bugs against the generators instead.

	ACK.

 > (Unfortunately, you might have to parse groff's warning text in order
 > to ignore particular cases.)

	I'm not familiar with Groff at all...  Does it allow later `.de'
	to override the former?..

 > .IX is probably from pod2man, which does:

[...]

 > Russ, perhaps this should be something like this instead to suppress
 > the warning?

[...]

 >> A simple-minded approach to suppress these warnings would be
 >> something like:

 >> .de IX
 >> .end

	... And if it does, this definition just could be put into
	lintian/groff-hack/{mdoc,man}.local, effectively suppressing the
	Groff warnings.

 >> but I believe that such a definition belongs to the macro package
 >> `man' uses.

 > man doesn't use any macro package of its own; it's all in groff. I'd
 > like to keep it that way if possible. Anyhow, since this is a macro
 > defined by a particular man page generator, it's not appropriate to
 > handle it in either man or groff.

	ACK.

 >> W: dvgrab: manpage-has-errors-from-man usr/share/man/de/man1/dvgrab.1.gz 308: warning: `..' not defined

 > Looks like a botched attempt to define a macro. (.. is what you use
 > to terminate a macro definition.)

	Looks more like a comment from the generator:

   305	Sections, no Front\-Cover Texts and no Back\-Cover Texts.  A copy 
   306	of the license can be found under 
   307	\fB/usr/share/common\-licenses/FDL\fP. 
   308	...\" created by instant / docbook\-to\-man, Wed 13 Dec 2000, 17:30

[...]

 >> W: dpkg-dev: manpage-has-errors-from-man usr/share/man/man1/dpkg-checkbuilddeps.1.gz 27: warning: `UR' not defined

 > .UR used to be what you used to mark up URLs; man(7) recommended it
 > until not that long ago.

	What to use instead?

[...]

 >> W: dirmngr: manpage-has-errors-from-man usr/share/man/man1/dirmngr.1.gz 245: warning: `#'' not defined

   244	Lines starting with a  
   245	'#'
   246	 are comments.

 >> W: dirmngr: manpage-has-errors-from-man usr/share/man/man1/dirmngr-client.1.gz 86: warning: `-vv'' not defined

    85	verbose commands to \fBdirmngr\fR, such as 
    86	'-vv'
    87	.

 > I don't have this installed, but they look like typos.

	Some misused quotes?

 >> W: dialog: manpage-has-errors-from-man usr/share/man/man3/dialog.3.gz 1494: warning: `..' not defined

 > Maybe another botched attempt to define a macro?

  1490	.TP 5
  1491	.B const char * \fIfmt
  1492	is the format of the \fBprintf\fP-like message to write.
  1493	.TP 5
  1494	...
  1495	are the variables to apply to the \fIfmt\fP format.

	More like an Attempt to render ellipsis.

[...]

 >> W: ddd: manpage-has-errors-from-man usr/share/man/man1/ddd.1.gz 34: warning: `PSPIC' not defined

 > This is sort of odd; that macro is defined in cases where the output
 > device is capable of drawing pictures using pic. I think it would be
 > best to ignore this one, although the warning could be suppressed
 > like this:

 > .if d PSPIC .PSPIC /tmp/buildd/ddd-3.3.11/./ddd/PICS/dddlogo.eps 10cm

	ACK.  Alternatively, an empty definition in
	groff-hack/{mdoc,man}.local could be used (``if not defined
	PSPIC, define empty PSPIC''.)

[...]



Reply to: