I think there were some good points raised in Cliff's email to Suse. I do agree that some sort of more transparent bug tracking/logging system would be a benefit to us all. I think many Linux companies are having to become 'Professional' too quickly for the resources that it obviously requires. None of us can complain about the amount of software that comes in every SuSE distribution and the rapidity of the improvements of packages in each release. But all this comes with a price, the need for much more intensive testing for more and more varied setups. For all their faults, Microsoft have struggled very hard to support the diverse range of equipment that exists and have huge resources to put into this and yet they suffer many of the same problems. We see strange oddities when we upgrade/install the latest release. Weird font settings in kde, a section on USB scanners in the manuals that refers to a usb system and configuration files that arent there ( it was upgraded to hotplug ). Seemingly weird problems compiling things like kde ( new version of autoconf ). 1. A bug/support tracking system could help by allowing a problem to be addressed/answered once and the rest of us being able to use that info. At the moment it is a case of scanning through the email group to see if someone else has solved the problem, and predictably we see the same questions popping up repeatedly. 2. I think that the changes from version to version need to be explained in much greater detail. I had to hack my old apache conf file to get it to work in the new setup, and the one that it was replaced by was even worse. It would be nice to know that the questions we ask, have been noted and examined. I dont think I have ever managed to upgrade my machine from one release to another without some major problems afterwards. The thing that keeps me returning to SuSE is this list, and being able to get at a huge library off the DVD which is permanently in my drive. dids