Re: man_MANS install locations

[Karl Berry]

Hi Jan,

    As for GNU/Linux, what was the rationale to only permit [0-9ln]?

No idea. Maybe just didn't think about "m", or maybe it didn't exist at
that time? Jim, Paul, anyone?

    Should automake be relaxed? 

I see no harm in allowing more (any) letters, if that's what you mean.

    When running automake on Solaris, placing svcadm.1m into man1 rather
    than man1m seems outright wrong.

But is Automake's purpose to reproduce platform-specific behavior, or to
have consistent behavior across platforms?  I think the latter.

I guess a new option to install *.1m in man1m/, etc., would be ok, if
you want it. If you or anyone can provide a patch, that would be
great. Unfortunately I doubt it's anything I will ever implement myself.

    Should the rpmlint check be adjusted to cater to the GNU FHS?

I guess that's a question for the rpmlint people, whoever they are.
I don't see that Automake's default behavior is going to change.

Also, GNU (as an organization) never had anything to do with the FHS,
so far as I know. I don't think the GNU coding standards/maintainer
information have anything to say about this topic ... --thanks, karl.