[bug #63163] [me] long footnote gets truncated

[Dave]

Follow-up Comment #1, bug #63163 (project groff):

Not that this case should fail, but that strikes me as an unusual way to use
.(f and .)f.  More typically, a document author will let -me place footnotes. 
The macro package tries to keep (at least the start of) a footnote on the same
page as the text that references it--but in order to do that, the author
should place the .(f and .)f right after the referencing text, rather than
waiting until where he thinks the bottom of the page will fall.

Indeed, moving the footnote block to right after the "long footnote" sentence
in the example gives a correct and sane layout.  But of course, the footnote
should also work correctly if the footnoted line is line 46.

Comment 6 over in bug #58447 shows another case where a -me footnote is
truncated.  Both that case and this one appear to be -me trying to carry a
footnote over to a final page, but never emitting that page.  The .ep macro,
the usual solution for ejecting pending footnotes, is no help for these cases
where the footnote has already begun.  (In the 58447 example, the lengthy
footnote has already been carried over to subsequent pages which _are_
emitted; it seems to be only the last that isn't.)


    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?63163>

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