Re: typesetting.{mom,pdf} and the groff build system (was: proposed "headline" items for groff 1.24.0)

At 2026-01-30T12:44:35-0500, Peter Schaffter wrote:
> typesetting.mom uses N and P for variety (demonstrating families),
> but where either is used, T is an acceptable substitute.  There's no
> reason to use H as the replacement.  With trivial tweaks, both the
> original and the Times Roman versions produce identical layouts.
> 
> typesetting.mom currently has this:
> 
>   .ie '\*[.T]'ps' \
>   .FAM      N     \" New Century Schoolbook family
>   .el .if '\*[.T]'pdf' \
>   .FAM      U-N
> 
> Is replacing the whole block (and the corresponding block for P) with
> 
>   .ie F NR .FAM N
>   .el .FAM T
> 
> sufficient,

Yes, to the best of my knowledge.

> or do '\*[.T]'ps' and '\*[.T]'pdf' still need to be handled
> separately?

I don't think so.  grops doesn't support multiple foundries, but if you
don't need to specify a foundry (to get the URW versions' increased
glyph coverage, say), there should be no difference.

Regards,
Branden

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=Goqy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----