Update of bug #68445 (group groff):
Status: None => Confirmed
Assigned to: None => gbranden
Planned Release: None => 1.25.0
_______________________________________________________
Follow-up Comment #2:
Yeah, I think we established in bug #68256 that `bd` is pretty creaky, and you
found flaws in several of my reform proposals. :-O
For _groff_ 1.25, which needs to go to release candidate soon (which means I
need to dial way down the fiddling with the formatter and give the
preprocessors and macro packages some love), I think I'll try to just fix this
issue with `bd`. Maybe I can get a reconstructed `bd` request into good shape
for Clem Cole in December for _groff_ 1.26.
Anyway, can reproduce:
$ printf '.bd TR 500\t\\" Comment\n' | ~/groff-1.24.1/bin/groff
troff:<standard input>:1: warning: ignoring third argument to font emboldening
request when first interpreted as mounting position and second as emboldening
amount
The issue is quasi-fixed already in Git HEAD:
$ printf '.bd TR 500\t\\" Comment\n' | ~/groff-HEAD/bin/groff 2>&1 | grep . ||
echo NO OUTPUT
NO OUTPUT
However:
$ printf '.bd TR 500\t\\" Comment\n' | ~/groff-HEAD/bin/groff -ww 2>&1 | grep
. || echo NO OUTPUT
troff:<standard input>:1: warning: interpreting second argument to font
emboldening request as emboldening amount; use a font name instead of a
mounting position as the first argument if conditional emboldening desired [-w
style]
Yeah, that needs to not be a "style" warning. I think that change might have
been my quarter-baked fix for bug #68256.
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?68445>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
