Follow-up Comment #12, bug #66143 (group groff): [comment #10 comment #10:] > > The dueling-pdftotexts problem should likely be a separate bug report. > > Sorry for the mess
Not at all; this is how bug reports are supposed to work. You report your
findings, but without enough info to determine whether they're related.
Subsequent research finds they're not, so new reports are opened to cover
them. I've made plenty of such "messes" in my time here.
I went ahead and opened a new ticket for the pdftotext issue: bug #66155.
> I thought about a configure test, issuing a warning if the
> wrong/missbehaving xpdf tools are found?
I don't think a tool working differently from what groff happened to expect is
wrong or misbehaving. It's just an unfortunate (but also unsurprising, given
the nature of the command) name collision between different contributors'
implementations of the same basic functionality. This to me isn't something
that needs to be warned about.
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?66143>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
