Re: FHS

[Thomas Bushnell, BSG]

Harlan Stenn <address@hidden> writes:

> > The changes here for the GNU Coding Standards (which I'm proposing,
> > and RMS has now agreed to) will not add any new paths, it will simply
> > change some that currently exist.
> 
> For this to be effective and useful, it would mean that most every GNU
> package would need to be updated, right?

Eventually.  Packages do not spring into compliance instantaneously.

> If this meant converting more packages to automake and upgrading the version 
> of autoconf that these packages used, that would be a Good Thing.

More or less, yes.