From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Juri Linkov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel,gmane.emacs.pretest.bugs Subject: Re: Regression in WoMan Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 02:14:47 +0200 Organization: JURTA Message-ID: <87sl19yyfy.fsf@jurta.org> References: <87ejcufxyn.fsf@gmx.de> <87zlvimtx8.fsf@jurta.org> <87hchpmvkq.fsf@gmx.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1199751920 11183 80.91.229.12 (8 Jan 2008 00:25:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 00:25:20 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org To: Sven Joachim Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jan 08 01:25:42 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JC2Hl-0003Nh-Ip for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 01:25:41 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JC2HO-00006D-Cr for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 19:25:18 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JC2HK-0008WE-D2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 19:25:14 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JC2HI-0008U5-CY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 19:25:13 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JC2HI-0008Tt-8L for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 19:25:12 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JC2HH-000310-SA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 19:25:12 -0500 Original-Received: from mail.gnu.org ([199.232.76.166] helo=mx10.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1JC2HH-0007up-Lu for emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 19:25:11 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JC2HE-00030E-Ea for emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 19:25:11 -0500 Original-Received: from relay03.kiev.sovam.com ([62.64.120.201]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JC2HE-0002zf-1f for emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 19:25:08 -0500 Original-Received: from [83.170.232.243] (helo=smtp.svitonline.com) by relay03.kiev.sovam.com with esmtp (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1JC2HA-000F3T-Ie; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 02:25:05 +0200 In-Reply-To: <87hchpmvkq.fsf@gmx.de> (Sven Joachim's message of "Mon, 07 Jan 2008 17:47:33 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-Scanner-Signature: ba97961d419726f65b83e74233c16638 X-DrWeb-checked: yes X-SpamTest-Envelope-From: juri@jurta.org X-SpamTest-Group-ID: 00000000 X-SpamTest-Header: Not Detected X-SpamTest-Info: Profiles 1976 [Dec 29 2007] X-SpamTest-Info: helo_type=3 X-SpamTest-Info: {HEADERS: header Content-Type found without required header Content-Transfer-Encoding} X-SpamTest-Method: none X-SpamTest-Rate: 19 X-SpamTest-Status: Not detected X-SpamTest-Status-Extended: not_detected X-SpamTest-Version: SMTP-Filter Version 3.0.0 [0255], KAS30/Release X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: FreeBSD 4.7-5.2 (or MacOS X 10.2-10.4) (2) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:86533 gmane.emacs.pretest.bugs:20544 Archived-At: > There seem to be three possibilities to solve the issue: have woman > insert a footer like man does; differentiate the treatment of the last > line between man and woman ; or remove the footer in man buffers as > well. > > What would be the best? The fourth possibility is to use the same regexps used to remove the footer by woman-man-buffer, to check the existence of the footer before ignoring the last line in Man-next-section. -- Juri Linkov http://www.jurta.org/emacs/