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:	<Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 980923151337 DOT 1392s-100000 AT is>
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

Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> wrote:
<Snipped>
>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)

- Raw text -