[bug #65427] troff segfaults when output file flush fails

2024-03-07 Thread Dave
Update of bug #65427 (group groff): Item Group:None => Crash/Unresponsive ___ Reply to this item at: ___ Message

[bug #65427] troff segfaults when output file flush fails

2024-03-07 Thread G. Branden Robinson
Update of bug #65427 (group groff): Severity: 3 - Normal => 4 - Important Status:None => In Progress Assigned to:None => gbranden __

[bug #65403] Meaning of ".if c" in nroff mode undocumented

2024-03-07 Thread Dave
Follow-up Comment #5, bug #65403 (group groff): Hmm, I'm hard-pressed to explain this, though. $ cat bullet_test .if c\[bu] .tm Bullet exists. .rchar \[bu] .if c\[bu] .tm Bullet still exists. $ groff -Tascii bullet_test Bullet exists. $ groff -Tlatin1 bullet_test Bullet exists. Bullet still exist

[bug #65403] Meaning of ".if c" in nroff mode undocumented

2024-03-07 Thread G. Branden Robinson
Follow-up Comment #6, bug #65403 (group groff): Because it gets translated first. .if !'\*[.T]'utf8' \{\ . ie c\[pc] \ .tr \[bu]\[pc] . el \ .if c\[md] \ . tr \[bu]\[md] .\} There's a ticket about this already, wondering about the complexity of it. See bug #56015. But even if

[bug #65403] Meaning of ".if c" in nroff mode undocumented

2024-03-07 Thread Dave
Follow-up Comment #7, bug #65403 (group groff): [comment #6 comment #6:] > There's a ticket about this already, wondering about the > complexity of it. See bug #56015. Oh, the ticket where I proposed a patch less than two months ago? Yes, I'm, uh, dimly aware of it. > But even if the translati

[bug #65427] troff segfaults when output file flush fails

2024-03-07 Thread G. Branden Robinson
Update of bug #65427 (group groff): Status: In Progress => Fixed Open/Closed:Open => Closed Planned Release:None => 1.24.0 __

[bug #65427] [troff] SEGV after invalidation of output file stream

2024-03-07 Thread G. Branden Robinson
Update of bug #65427 (group groff): Summary: troff segfaults when output file flush fails => [troff] SEGV after invalidation of output file stream ___ Reply to this item at: _

[bug #63354] Refine fallbacks.tmac

2024-03-07 Thread Dave
Follow-up Comment #35, bug #63354 (group groff): This looks great! Here's the definition from the sample file, broken down and commented, and trivially refactored (to avoid performing the same \w twice when the value of the first is already stored in a register): . char \[u2012] \R#wzero \w'0'u