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

On Tuesday, 3 February 2026 17:21:28 GMT G. Branden Robinson wrote:
> Hi Deri,
> 
> At 2026-02-03T16:37:34+0000, Deri wrote:
> > On Monday, 2 February 2026 17:48:11 GMT G. Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > > As you failed to generate a proper basic run, consideration of what
> > > > happens next is moot.
> > > 
> > > I'm going to disregard the rest of your message, as you're having
> > > obvious trouble comprehending mine.
> > > 
> > > Let me know when you make sense of it.
> > 
> > Ah, the mists are clearing. My instructions were confusing, sorry.
> 
> Acknowledged.  Properly supporting multiple configurations can be a real
> PITA.
> 
> > "after make these fonts available..."
> > 
> > Would have been much better expressed as
> > 
> > "after running 'make' you should see these fonts"
> 
> Font _descriptions_...
> 
> Yeah, but see them _where_?  In the build tree, or the installation
> directory?
> 
> > (sometimes my v. slow typing makes me too succinct so my true meaning
> > is lost).
> 
> Also there always lurks the devil of terminological precision.  :)
> 
> > Due to this confusion you showed me the contents of the devpdf install
> > directory after 'make install'.
> > 
> > I'm very glad you did. My focus is on building the appropriate files
> > correctly, I assumed that the install phase would promote those built
> > objects to the proper install directory, so I don't test that as often
> > as I should. I would not have realised this is not what is happening
> > now.
> 
> Where "now" = 1.24.0.rc2, I think that's a correct assessment.
> 
> The install phase will not do things properly if we don't take explicit
> steps to ensure that it does.  Automake handles a lot of stuff for us,
> but a device-independent troff's font management infrastructure is not
> among that stuff.
> 
> > Using current master (same for rc2) in the basic mode (no gs command
> > and no separate urw fonts found) running 'make' generates these
> > files:-
> > 
> > [derij@pip build (master)]$ ls font/devpdf
> > CB   CI  DESC      enc/  Foundry  HBI  HR    S   symbolsl.afm  TB   TI 
> > util/ CBI  CR  download  EURO  HB       HI   map/  SS  symbolsl.pfb  TBI 
> > TR  ZD
> > 
> > These are the correct files which should be promoted to the install
> > directory for basic mode.
> 
> ...minus the "util" directory, which hasn't been installed since groff
> 1.22.3.
> 
> A more salient point is that we see only font descriptions for the PDF
> Base 14 fonts.  That seems okay to me.  (I'd be okay with installing
> font descriptions for all PostScript level 2 Base 35 fonts at this
> "basic" support level, too, supposing that with Free Software versions
> of these being widely available, PDF readers may have them "built-in"
> even if the standard doesn't require them to do so.)
> 
> Further, since that's what my working copy is doing, so I'd rather not
> perturb it unless someone feels strongly that we need to change it for
> "correctness".
> 
> > [derij@pip build (master)]$ sudo make install
> > [...]
> > [derij@pip build (master)]$ ls /usr/local/share/groff/1.24.0/font/devpdf
> > AB   BMB   CB   DESC      Foundry  HNB   HR    NI   PI  symbolsl.afm  TI
> > ABI  BMBI  CBI  download  HB       HNBI  map/  NR   PR  symbolsl.pfb  TR
> > AI   BMI   CI   enc/      HBI      HNI   NB    PB   S   TB            ZCMI
> > AR   BMR   CR   EURO      HI       HNR   NBI   PBI  SS  TBI           ZD
> > 
> > Exactly like you showed me when I was showing you font/devpdf. If I
> > now look again  at the devpdf build directory:-
> > 
> > [derij@pip build (master)]$ ls font/devpdf
> > AB   BMB   CB   DESC      Foundry  HNB   HR    NI   PI  symbolsl.afm  TI  
> >  ZD ABI  BMBI  CBI  download  HB       HNBI  map/  NR   PR  symbolsl.pfb 
> > TR AI   BMI   CI   enc/      HBI      HNI   NB    PB   S   TB           
> > util/ AR   BMR   CR   EURO      HI       HNR   NBI   PBI  SS  TBI        
> >   ZCMI
> > 
> > These extra (non base-14) fonts have appeared in the build directory
> > and been installed. Is this normal make install behaviour.
> 
> Not if you "make distclean" and re-"configure" after uninstalling
> whatever packages supply the URW Base 35 fonts on your system.  :)

Ok, thanks I'll try exactly that, let me know if I am doing something wrong.

URW fonts gone. Check
Ghostscript gone. Check
git checkout master. Check

Now go. (cwd 'build' directory)

make uninstall
make distclean

# A bit of belt'n'braces
cd ..
rm -rf build
mkdir build
cd build
rm -rf /usr/local/share/groff/1.24.0
###

../configure --without-urw-fonts
# see missing ghostscript message and no urw fonts
make -j

make check

============================================================================
# TOTAL: 310
# PASS:  299
# SKIP:  6
# XFAIL: 5
# FAIL:  0
# XPASS: 0
# ERROR: 0
============================================================================

$ ls font/devpdf
CB   CI  DESC      enc/  Foundry  HBI  HR    S   symbolsl.afm  TB   TI  util/
CBI  CR  download  EURO  HB       HI   map/  SS  symbolsl.pfb  TBI  TR  ZD

sudo make install

$ ls font/devpdf
AB   BMB   CB   DESC      Foundry  HNB   HR    NI   PI  symbolsl.afm  TI    ZD
ABI  BMBI  CBI  download  HB       HNBI  map/  NR   PR  symbolsl.pfb  TR
AI   BMI   CI   enc/      HBI      HNI   NB    PB   S   TB            util/
AR   BMR   CR   EURO      HI       HNR   NBI   PBI  SS  TBI           ZCMI

Those extra files added to font/devpdf again by 'make install' (i.e. after 
'make check' so we are installing files which were not present when the check 
was done), what have I done wrong - if you are saying it should not happen.

> 
> > It has changed the files after all the groff pdf documents have been
> > produced by 'make' and then 'make check'ed.  So 'make check' has been
> > run before the contents of font/devpdf has been altered.
> 
> We rely on a stamp file, font/devpdf/stamp.  Unfortunately, the stamp
> file is not made out of date by NOT removing files that it _no longer_
> depends on.  So a possibility exists for running the tests against a
> configuration that no longer reflects the state of the system.
> 

Note the entire 'build' directory was removed prior to configure.

Cheers

Deri