[bug #62941] groff no longer warns about nonexistent font

[Dave]

URL:
  <https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?62941>

                 Summary: groff no longer warns about nonexistent font
                 Project: GNU troff
               Submitter: barx
               Submitted: Mon 22 Aug 2022 09:36:28 PM CDT
                Category: Core
                Severity: 3 - Normal
              Item Group: Warning/Suspicious behaviour
                  Status: None
                 Privacy: Public
             Assigned to: None
             Open/Closed: Open
         Discussion Lock: Any
         Planned Release: None


    _______________________________________________________

Follow-up Comments:


-------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon 22 Aug 2022 09:36:28 PM CDT By: Dave <barx>
When encountering a .fam request for a nonexistent font, groff used to warn
about it.  This is with groff 1.22.4:

$ printf '.fam BOGUS\n' | groff
troff: <standard input>:1: warning: can't find font 'BOGUSR'
$ 


Output from 1.23.0.rc1 is identical.  But from latest git (specifically, groff
1.23.0.rc1.2850-2aa53-dirty), the warning is absent:

$ printf '.fam BOGUS\n' | groff
$ 


Maybe groff is smarter now, and only emits a warning when attempting to _use_
a nonexistent font, rather than when merely setting one?

$ printf '.fam BOGUS\nabc\n' | groff | wc
    236     626    5724
$ 


OK, maybe this warning is now off by default, and needs to be turned on?

$ printf '.fam BOGUS\nabc\n' | groff -ww | wc
    236     626    5724
$ 


Nope.  As far as I can tell, the warning has entirely disappeared.

Commit d8cb8cf9
<http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/groff.git/commit/?id=d8cb8cf9> overhauled
the font warning system, and falls into the correct time frame (between rc1
and now) (of course, so do thousands of other commits).  The commit log
example shows it making warnings more numerous and verbose, but perhaps this
is a case that fell through the cracks?  </baseless speculation>

Probably irrelevant:
* The similar bug #62656 was present in 1.22.4.  The bug I'm reporting worked
as expected in 1.22.4, but does not in more recent code.
* I discovered this when poking into bug #62934 (which I was ultimately unable
to reproduce because I lacked the needed font).







    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?62941>

_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/