Hi Keita, Ikumi Keita <ik...@ikumi.que.jp> writes:
> It would need to write a new sentinel for latexmk if we are going to > provide the most suitable candidate in all cases. And I was hoping we can avoid that :-| > AUCTeX users can deginate latex binary file names through > `TeX-engine-alist' and `LaTeX-command', which can be different from > standard "latex", "xelatex" and "lualatex". If we are to support such > non-standard binary names, we need %l. (However, maybe this isn't much > meaningful because fixed binary names of "latexmk" and "dvipdfmx" after > all in my patch. :-)) So the question is: What is the best course of action? I have no problems with %l, but breaking Windows compatibility is bad. Best, Arash
