Update of bug #67571 (group groff):
Status: Need Info => Postponed
Summary: [troff] `class` request works or not depending on
where in the input it's called => [troff] "effective flags" ineffective if
output occurs between `class` and `cflags` requests
_______________________________________________________
Follow-up Comment #36:
[comment #35 comment #35:]
> Can you improve the summary?
To me the vagueness of the summary was a feature: it means the responsibility
for explicating the scope of the bug was left to bug comments, which don't
have small character limits. The summary serves as a reminder of what the bug
is about, rather than a specification from which a reproducer can be deduced.
But as requested, I've revised the summary to reflect one failure case, that
of the aforementioned "even more minimal" reproducer. I'm not convinced this
summary captures all the failure modes, so I don't consider it necessarily
"improved," but it is definitely more specific. Feel free to further whack at
it.
>> I feel no urgency to pursue it until after the 1.24 typhoon
>
> Agreed.
Also updated the Status to reflect our current mutual apathy.
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?67571>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
