Follow-up Comment #6, bug #68284 (group groff):

[comment #5 comment #5:]
> And it doesn't seem, four or so years later, to be all that
> costly in proportional word count to find a place to stick the
> word "read-only" back in where applicable.

This documentation issue has been punted to bug #68287.


    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?68284>

_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to