> > 1. Not everyone will want things in these directories. I don't care > about the debate of /usr/local vs. /usr or whatever, I'm just saying > that things work differently on different systems and having a > hardcoded build is not a good way to make anyone happy. I use /usr/local/ for all non-system programs, because of how I set up my diskspace. So, I agree, I'd enjoy seeing a bit of flexibility in where the program ends up > > 2. The original point of talking about this was that we'll need to > compile extensions. Using hand written Makefiles is *very* bad and > non-portable (that's why I'm making Jarl fight with autoconf :-). I recently tried installing a package that had a hand-written Makefile ported from a whole 'nother architecture. What a nightmare. I think it's a wonderous thing that I can go into any gnome system cvs and type 'autoconf blah blah' and it's a no-brainer. For the most part. There are some little adjustments here and there, but otherwise, i sing the praises of autoconf. d