Follow-up Comment #10, bug #67380 (group groff): [comment #8 comment #8:] > If you're using `ab` to troubleshoot a document > *with _groff_*, break the line (by any means) first.
Agree.
> [Another set of experiments later...]
>
> This appears to be what `fl` is for!
With groff having a different buffering system than other roffs, I suppose it
makes sense that "fl" behaves differently.
> we could change "`fl" to go ahead and write the document preamble.
Sure, but is there any real-world benefit to that? As the manual says, .fl
was designed for interactive nroffing, which already mostly doesn't work in
groff anyway.
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?67380>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
