FWIW, Linda:

You implied that you were using prebuilt packages, and only as a last
resort installed from pkgsrc.

I long ago gave up on binary packages.  I've found that they have defaults
compiled in (defaults that I don't care for), or even sometimes have weird
dependancy mis-matches.  Building from source solved those problems.  I've
never looked back.

I do have KDE installed on a system, with pkgsrc SUP'ed around the first
week of December.  You might try using CVS to synch your pkgsrc to that
date, and then *build* all of your packages from scratch.  (Yes, that can
take a while.  But I have KDE installed and running from that.)  You can
probably pick most other pkgsrc dates as well, though I have hit periods
of ``outtages'' for complex packages like KDE.

I used to SUP pkgsrc on a regular basis, but after rebuilding all and
sundry for the Nth time because some program clammored for a 3rd-tier
version update to libpng, I largely stopped tracking pkgsrc.  Now I only
update pkgsrc if I'm updating everything anyway, or if I really need
something from a fresher version of pkgsrc.


However, having kept KDE and GNOME installed on my machine for some little
time, my opinion is: They are monsters.  (^&

I only casually/experimentally use them for myself.  Although I've never
professionally administered systems, I'd be leary of putting either KDE or
GNOME up on a system that I was paid to administer.  I think that the rest
of the system would be okay, but I'd probably never hear the end of
complaints about this-or-that not working in KDE or GNOME.

(If I had to put one or the other up, I'd go with KDE, though.  It's
proven more stable.  Also, the main value that these things seem to have
is that they more or less emulate MS-WINDOWS.  KDE does a better job of
that; GNOME's had a strong visual appeal early on, but has lost much of
that without gaining much anywhere else.)


  ``I probably don't know what I'm talking about.'' --rauch@math.rice.edu