From: pjfarley AT banet DOT net (Peter J. Farley III) Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: Do we have a "ditroff" equivalent in DJGPP? Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 02:31:16 GMT Message-ID: <3609ae5d.8738151@news2.banet.net> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: 32.100.252.247 Organization: IBM.NET Lines: 30 To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Precedence: bulk Eli Zaretskii wrote: >Did you try without the -Pip2 switch? Groff's -P switch does something >entirely different than whoever wrote that ditroff command meant. (I >don't know what does ditroff -Pfoo does, but if you look at Groff docs, >you will realize that Groff's -P is *very* different.) Just tried it now, and that did the trick. Using -Tps gave good PostScript output, and GhostView was able to both display and print it. Thanks! >> TIA for any advice or info on this. BTW, just what does "ditroff" >> stand for, anyway? "display troff", maybe? Or "device independant >> troff"? Or what? > >ditroff is device-independent troff. My guess will be that Groff is >quite a good replacement for it, so I'd advise to see if that command >works without -Pip2. > >Otherwise, you will have to find a system with ditroff installed and read >the docs there to find out what does -Pip2 mean. No need, since omitting the -Pip2 did the trick. And thanks for the definition, too. ---------------------------------------------------- Peter J. Farley III (pjfarley AT nospam DOT dorsai DOT org OR pjfarley AT nospam DOT banet DOT net)