Re: [Groff] Re: new grohtml patches

[Gaius Mulley]

Gaius Mulley <address@hidden> writes:

> Werner LEMBERG <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> > > > Hmm, the actual code is e.g.
> > > > 
> > > >   <p align=center>Figure 6-5: <b>circle fill; move; circle
> > > >   fill 0.4; move; circle</b></p>
> > > > 
> > > >   <p align=center><b>fill 0.9;</b></p>
> > > > 
> > > > There are neither tabs nor indentation, as far as I can see.  I
> > > > think this should be rather
> > > > 
> > > >   <p align=center>Figure 6-5: <b>circle fill; move; circle
> > > >   fill 0.4; move; circle fill 0.9;</b></p>
> > > 
> > > yes this is desirable.  My comment on the line length set to
> > > infinity was a general one.  But I guess we could set the line
> > > length temporarily to infinity when we are processing a .ce request
> > > and nofill == 0.  Would there be any side effects if this were done?
> > 
> > Currently I can't find a counterexample.
> 
> ok, thanks. On another note I think my patch has introduced a bug in
> troff :-(. I'm frantically trying to fix it..

hmm, interesting - it appears my test code was at fault. I didn't have
a `.br' at the start and end of a diversion and this caused weird
output. Strangely the behavior changed between CVS of July and CVS
prior to the new grohtml patches.

Anyway end of panic..

Gaius