Hi all, On Tue, Oct 07 2014 at 08:00:41 PM, Werner LEMBERG <w...@gnu.org> wrote: >>> Both files `groff.man' as `groff.1n' and `groff.7n' as source and as >>> `groff.1' and `groff.7' after compiling. >> >> The "compiling" is the substitution of `@g@', for example? Why not >> groff.1.in, echoing Makefile.in and friends that also under go >> simple substitution, producing groff.1? > > ... and I like this even more, since it is natural within the > autotools infrastructure :-) Anyways, an issue in the tracker would be > good.
Makes sense, I can do that or share the work with Bernd as he offered to work on it if large manual renaming are necessary. But it would be better to do this after the automake development is merged into master. Bernd, you can assign the bug to me. Regards, -- Bertrand Garrigues
