Date:	Tue, 3 Nov 1998 10:56:45 +0200 (IST)
From:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender:	eliz AT is
To:	Nate Eldredge <nate AT cartsys DOT com>
cc:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: TeXing libc/libm docs
In-Reply-To:	<363E9EC3.A79B4468@cartsys.com>
Message-ID:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.981103105045.19001C-100000@is>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

On Mon, 2 Nov 1998, Nate Eldredge wrote:

> IMHO and FWIW, overfull boxes are not necessarily deadly and not
> necessarily fixable.  It might be instructive to view the DVI and see
> how bad it actually is.

It is bad, otherwise I wouldn't mention it.  The amount of overfullness 
printed by TeX together with the message is enough info to judge how bad 
is it.  In my experience, anything larger than 10 is ugly, even with 
@finalout.

As to whether it is fixable, I think in this case it is, and quite 
easily.  The vast majority of the cases are from the @example fragments 
which evidently use long lines, and TeX doesn't hyphenate inside 
@example.  So just reformatting those examples will probably eliminate 
most of the problems.

> So you saw no errors that caused TeX to stop?

None.

> > For the record: libc.dvi produces a 490-page long printed version (no, I
> > didn't actually send it to the printer ;-).
> 
> I wonder if anybody ever has or ever will?

I guess somebody will.  Those v2gnu/*d.zip files are there for a reason.  
There's even a FAQ section about printed docs, and it is there because 
people kept asking about it.

- Raw text -