Path: csiph.com!goblin3!goblin.stu.neva.ru!panix!usenet.stanford.edu!not-for-mail From: Dave Newsgroups: gnu.groff.bug Subject: [bug #59030] some warnings still emitted with Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2020 05:02:09 -0400 (EDT) Lines: 38 Approved: bug-groff@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <20200828-034839.sv93119.86587@savannah.gnu.org> <20200828-040209.sv93119.3945@savannah.gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lists.gnu.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=UTF-8 X-Trace: usenet.stanford.edu 1598605332 24303 209.51.188.17 (28 Aug 2020 09:02:12 GMT) X-Complaints-To: action@cs.stanford.edu To: Dave , bug-groff@gnu.org Envelope-to: bug-groff@gnu.org X-PHP-Originating-Script: 1001:sendmail.php X-Savane-Server: savannah.gnu.org:443 [2001:470:142::72] X-Savane-Project: groff X-Savane-Tracker: bugs X-Savane-Item-ID: 59030 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/45.0 X-Apparently-From: 2605:a601:ab42:5b00:d79a:70a3:b6a4:34bf (Savane authenticated user barx) In-Reply-To: <20200828-034839.sv93119.86587@savannah.gnu.org> X-BeenThere: bug-groff@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Bug reports for the GNU version of nroff, troff et al" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Mailman-Original-Message-ID: <20200828-040209.sv93119.3945@savannah.gnu.org> X-Mailman-Original-References: <20200828-034839.sv93119.86587@savannah.gnu.org> Xref: csiph.com gnu.groff.bug:1997 Follow-up Comment #1, bug #59030 (project groff): Apparently hitting an accidental "return" with the cursor in the summary field tells savannah "Submit this now!" no matter how few fields are populated. The summary was to have read, "some warnings still emitted with all warnings turned off". The body was to have read: $ echo .nr .g 4 | groff -Ww troff: :1: error: can't write read-only register -Ww is supposed to silence all warnings, but doesn't. Why would this one need to be silenced, you wonder? Isn't trying to assign to a read-only register something the user should just correct? As it turns out, using the .g register to distinguish GNU groff from Heirloom troff is not as straightforward as it should be, because Heirloom has a "groff compatibility mode" that sets .g to 1. What _is_ different between them, however, is that Heirloom lets you assign to .g, whereas groff (as the example above shows) does not. So this is a reliable test to see which troff you're running; however, it generates an unsilenceable warning in groff. _______________________________________________________ Reply to this item at: _______________________________________________ Message sent via Savannah https://savannah.gnu.org/