From owner-freebsd-questions  Tue Apr 18 13:00:52 1995
Return-Path: questions-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id NAA16284
          for questions-outgoing; Tue, 18 Apr 1995 13:00:52 -0700
Received: from aero.org (aero.org [130.221.16.2])
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id NAA16275
          for <questions@freebsd.org>; Tue, 18 Apr 1995 13:00:45 -0700
Received: from antares.aero.org ([130.221.192.46]) by aero.org with SMTP id <111105-1>; Tue, 18 Apr 1995 13:00:06 -0700
Received: from anpiel.aero.org by antares.aero.org (4.1/AMS-1.0)
	id AA27823 for questions@freebsd.org; Tue, 18 Apr 95 12:59:52 PDT
To: questions@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Is 'groff' broken?
Date: 	Tue, 18 Apr 1995 12:59:42 -0700
From: "Mike O'Brien" <obrien@antares.aero.org>
Message-Id: <95Apr18.130006pdt.111105-1@aero.org>
Sender: questions-owner@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

	Was anything done to 'groff' on its way to the 2.0R release?
I tried to run off some man pages for a package whose man pages
were in -me format, and it didn't work bigtime.  The -me macro
package in the tmac library seemed to have been renamed, and didn't
work all that well when it was renamed back.

Mike O'Brien