On Sun, Sep 05, 2010, Werner Lemberg wrote: > > Another question/oddity. Although it isn't likely one would need > > two .R1 / .R2 blocks in the same document, in the case that one > > does, the second causes groff (or refer? I'm not sure which) to emit > > to stderr > > > > test: 12: .R1: unexpected operator > > > > unless the .R1 is followed by a blank argument, like this > > > > .R1 "" > > Example, please.
No need. I discovered the source of the problem. My error, again. (I really need a break.) I use a script to process groff files, and carelessly introduced a bug in the function that tests whether groff needs the -R option for a given file. -- Peter Schaffter Author of The Binbrook Caucus http://www.schaffter.ca
