including <stdlib.h>

[Robert Lipe]

> 	Another approach would be to supply a "system.h" file which
> includes various headers (eg stdlib.h), provides possibly missing system
> prototypes (eg bcopy) and possibly missing system macros (eg R_OK),
> etc., and each gcc source file could then include this file if desired
> to get default stuff.  (Or the source file could instead enumerate these
> things manually if the default system.h is not appropriate.)

This would ease maintenance costs, but would presumably cost us
something during the compilation phase becuase then everything that
includes systems.h also picks up a presumably non-small amount of header
stuff that it now gets to preprocess.  I don't know what that cost
actually is in measureable terms, and we might decide it's worth it.
I just wanted to throw it out for discussion.

Personally, if the cost is anything less than horrible, I'm inclined
to support a migration to it.

> 	Hmmm, I just checked the list archive and for some reason the
> file I submitted seems to have stripped all the include statements so
> they appear without the file its trying to include inside <>.  Wierd... 

I've noticed that on the web archives.  I assumed it was the
html-ification process not correctly replacing those characters with &lt
and &gt so as to escape them from tags.