Josephine wrote:
I doubt the secretary or manager's assistant needs QT-devel, gtk libraries or latest kernel sources...
Josephine
Here...here.. Josephine......:) What I personally find interesting are the changes that have happened since Linux has gotten 'popular'. Traditional Linux users used to pride themselves on how long they can keep boxes running with out upgrades and in fact use the axiom to this day even that unless there is a need to add new features to a kernel there is no need to upgrade. Everything else can be patched especially security issues. In fact in a recent discussion list on my local lug were we asked who has the longest running server, several have reported uptimes measured in years. The oldest is on a 486 installed as a router, still in production and booted sometime in 1996 and only taken down recently due to hardware failure, and rebooted...:) For those new to Linux, the concept of upgrades is a vintage and legacy competitor marketing ploy used for up sell and for delivery of poor initial product quality. Sure its fun to test and try things out, but for people who are serious or for production conditions upgrades (not updates) are at most a annual event. Even then it is only recommended if hardware support requirements are the issue. The counter argument of course is to simply update the existing kernel and associated libraries. Clearly the upgrade path is for newbies and marketeers that can lead into a very clearly delineated, costly dead end. If on the other had you want to play, fill your boots and support SuSE/Novell by purchasing the latest consumer distro under subscription. SuSE still ships with the most and most interesting software. Can this be done independently? Of course it can. A simple download, ./configure, make and make install will cure even the most curious at little or no cost..:) Regards /ch