Follow-up Comment #26, bug #61423 (group groff): We did eventually get a complaint about this.
The message came to me privately but Joerg gave me permission to quote it to the list, so I did. > one example where this apparently has happened recently: mismatch > between file name and "internal" name of a font description file now > throws an error and the requested font is not used at all although > available (in my case I put a softlink into devps to augment some font > family by an italics font (since no such font was part of that font > family in the first place. in this way it was "documented" in the file > system at least what font actually was used. this used to work. but > recently (probably with 1.23) I have started to get that error and > refusal to switch to that perfectly fine italics font... I now, > therefore, had to cp the font and edit the internal name to make it > work again. so for me this is an example where I would deem the error > checking too strict. https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/groff/2024-10/msg00058.html I directed his attention to this ticket. Haven't heard back yet. _______________________________________________________ Reply to this item at: <https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?61423> _______________________________________________ Message sent via Savannah https://savannah.gnu.org/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
