Update of bug #65077 (group groff):
Status: Rejected => Need Info
Assigned to: barx => None
Open/Closed: Closed => Open
_______________________________________________________
Follow-up Comment #5:
[comment #4 comment #4:]
> Rejected? Why?
Consider spending some time _reading_ the comments to tickets in addition to
writing them, Keith.
[comment #3 comment #3:]
> Closing with no response from submitter in four months. Submitter, please
> feel free to comment here if you have additional information, and this bug
> report can be reopened if necessary.
> This is a critical
Oh my God. It's critical. I'll drop everything at once.
Welcome back, Keith--I see you've lost none of your talent for hysterics,
hyberbole, and harangue of your fellow developers.
> regression from groff-1.22.4, which I discovered only this week,
> after removing a modified 1.22.4 copy of s.tmac from my
> groff-pdfmark working tree; this regression _seriously_ messes up
> the front-matter layout of pdfmark.pdf.
Thanks for identifying an actual document that exhibits undesired behavior;
I'll have a look. Can't make any promises for the _groff_ 1.24.0 release,
though.
> I filed a new ticket for this, as bug #66442; it's effectively a duplicate,
> reopening this.
Shockingly, Savannah supports marking tickets as duplicates, so I'll be
closing that one, then.
Reopening. An A/B comparison of _groff_ 1.22.4's "contrib/pdfmark/pdfmark.ms"
using _groff_ 1.22.4 and 1.23.0 (and ultimately Git HEAD) is warranted to
triage this issue.
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?65077>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
