[bug #64484] [troff] .device and \X don't behave the same

Follow-up Comment #10, bug #64484 (group groff): Already reopened, but for the record.. commit 190d01502ec8f8caab05bd3eb11ee04411c1e332 Author: G. Branden Robinson Date: Mon Mar 4 00:14:39 2024 -0600 Revert "[troff]: Fix Savannah #64484." This reverts commit

[bug #64484] [troff] .device and \X don't behave the same

Update of bug#64484 (group groff): Status: Fixed => Need Info Open/Closed: Closed => Open ___ Follow-up Comment #9: Having second thoughts

[bug #64484] [troff] .device and \X don't behave the same

Update of bug#64484 (group groff): Severity: 2 - Minor => 3 - Normal Item Group: Incorrect behaviour => Feature change Status: In Progress => Fixed Open/Closed:

[bug #64484] [troff] .device and \X don't behave the same

Update of bug#64484 (group groff): Status:None => In Progress ___ Reply to this item at: ___ Message

[bug #64484] [troff] .device and \X don't behave the same

Follow-up Comment #7, bug#64484 (group groff): My last paragraph in comment #6 was a bit mangled. Let me try that again. The foregoing means that I should abandon my plan to make a new fatal error in response to bug #65138 and also that the scenario in question is probably a corner case.

[bug #64484] [troff] .device and \X don't behave the same

Follow-up Comment #6, bug#64484 (group groff): [comment #5 comment #5:] > Another oddity is that you can invoke the `device` request too early, and it won't be honored, but can use `\X` anywhere you want. This turns out to be due to the presence of a break on a line using the \X escape sequence,

[bug #64484] [troff] .device and \X don't behave the same

Follow-up Comment #5, bug#64484 (group groff): Another oddity is that you can invoke the `device` request too early, and it won't be honored, but can use `\X` anywhere you want. $ cat EXPERIMENTS/device-control-escape-sequence.roff \X'ps: nop' $ ~/groff-stable/bin/groff -Z

[bug #64484] [troff] .device and \X don't behave the same

Follow-up Comment #4, bug #64484 (project groff): [comment #2 comment #2:] > I don't know whether the pdfmark macros rely on the asciifying > behaviour of \X or not. While pdfmark is now maintained externally, Keith should still be able to post to savannah bugs, so I'm cc:ing him for his input

[bug #64484] [troff] .device and \X don't behave the same

Update of bug #64484 (project groff): Status: Need Info => None ___ Follow-up Comment #3: [comment #2 comment #2:] > There are 4 separate ways to send text to a postprocessor. Thanks,

[bug #64484] [troff] .device and \X don't behave the same

Update of bug #64484 (project groff): Severity: 3 - Normal => 2 - Minor Assigned to:deri => gbranden ___ Follow-up Comment #2: There are 4 separate

[bug #64484] [troff] .device and \X don't behave the same

URL: Summary: [troff] .device and \X don't behave the same Group: GNU roff Submitter: gbranden Submitted: Fri 28 Jul 2023 10:22:42 AM UTC Category: Core

[bug #64484] [troff] .device and \X don't behave the same

Update of bug #64484 (project groff): Status:None => Need Info Assigned to:None => deri ___ Follow-up Comment #1: Assigning to Deri to