\version "2.11.21" \paper{ragged-right=##t} \new Voice \with { \remove "Forbid_line_break_engraver" } { c'4 c'2 c'2 \break % now the break is allowed (in theory) c'2 c'4 }

Do you know which versions gave the behaviour you want? Because according to my understanding, the current behaviour is correct. The break is not at a barline, so it is ignored. If you add a \bar "", the break works.

The problem, I think, is that this example does not demonstrate what it is supposed to. Looking at section 11.4.1, this is supposed to be an example of a way to allow line breaks at bar lines even when a note overruns the bar line. The code for that would be

\version "2.11.21" \paper{ragged-right=##t} \new Voice \with { \remove "Forbid_line_break_engraver" } { c'4 c'2 << c'2 {s4 \break s4} >> % now the break is allowed (in theory and practice) c'2 c'4 }

so that the \break actually falls on the barline.

I thought I'd seen the example working in a previous version, but I just checked a few of the old manuals and I can't see it working. However, Han-Wen added this to the manual last Oct, so clearly he thinks it's supposed to work:

http://git.sv.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=lilypond.git;a=commit;h=cc2dd740e57945334d613ea73707bd48c3d33cdc

No, Joe is right. Han-Wen was probably drunk when he wrote that.

FWIW, the behavior of \remove Forbid_line_break_engraver works great in 2.11.23. That is that given examples 1 and 2 below ...

%%% EX 1 %%%

\version "2.11.23"

\new Staff { \new Voice \with { \remove Forbid_line_break_engraver } { c'4 c'2 c'2 \break c'2 c'4 } }

%%% END %%%

%%% EX 2 %%%

\new Staff << \new Voice \with { \remove Forbid_line_break_engraver } { c'4 c'2 c'2 c'2 c'4 } \new Voice { s1 \break s1 } >>

%%% END %%%

... example 1 does not break in midduration while example does break in midduration.

This is the correct behavior because the \break in ex 1 does not coincide with a barline while the \break in ex 2 does coincide with a barline.

(So if the new status of "verified" means "this is in fact a bug", I might suggest changing to closed because the behavior is good.)

Mao, I'm completely confused about this issue now. But example 2 does indeed work. I've added it to the docs.

"Verified" means that the fix (in this case, Han-Wen saying that it never worked) was accepted by me, so the bug report can be completely ignored for the rest of eternity. :)