🚀 go-pugleaf

	I feel kind of stupid interupting your legal discussions for an
actual GNU related topic (anyone for gnu.misc.legal? gnu.misc.lpf?)

	I've been happily using GNU software for several years now, and
was wondering just how much of a connection there is between the
different utilities.  I've found a few progs that don't compile cleanly
with gcc (I'd kind of expect this to be a requirement).  And then there's
emacs, which requires editting all of the makefiles to get it to complile
with gcc (unless there's some undocumented hack for this).  Some utils
want to live in /usr/local/gnubin (sounds like a good place to me), and
put the man pages in /usr/local/man/man1/g{util}.1 (sounds ok also), and
put the lib files in /usr/local/lib (great).  So there's a generic place
for GNUtools right?  Doesn't seem like it.  Many tools are still putting
things in random locations (some I believe are site specific), etc.  And
the g++ install docs talk about a gcc directory (gcc-test) that has never
been part of any gcc distribution I've installed (that I can remember ;-)
Personally, I'm not exactly sure what g++ expects to be in it (is this
the stage builds?)
	All this gets me wondering.  Is there any control going on here?
Am I the only person who cares about this (I'm in the middle of
reinstalling the entire GNU tool set).  Is there a possiblity of a GNU
system config file (kind of like with imake) so we don't have to hack every
single Makefile to say the same damn thing?  Am I asking too much (most
likely)?


Thanks,
Michael
lamour@mitre.org

PS> Consistency would be nice.