(a) Instead of ``make install clean clean-depends'', you can just do
``make update''.  ``make update'' has the added advantage of effectively
updating packages (it actually first removes the indicated package,
including whatever depends upon it, and then installs the package,
including anything that it removed; it should also update anything that it
depends upon and which is too outdated to be used for the update).

The downside of ``make update'' is that sometimes it can have far-ranging
effects on your system...  I.e., it can cause a lot of bits and pieces to
be (re)built, if you have a lot of old pacages and have updated pkgsrc.


(b) It's not clear that the original question really *is* after KDE.  To
djroyal-t: KDE is a desktop environment.  It provides the common desktop
metaphor for your filesystem, and so forth. But you need to have the
``basic GUI system'' (the X Window System) installed and configured,
first.  Without X set up, you can't run KDE, fvwm, twm, ...

Installing X isn't difficult; when you installed NetBSD, if you used the
standard installer, you would get X installed by just asking for it at a
certain stage.

Configuring X is a little more of a problem.  If you've never set up X
before, it may be easier to get XFree86 4.0 or later (assuming that you
are using an i386 machine).  XFree86 4.0 has an auto-configuration feature
that seems to do a pretty good job.  (Though you may need to do some
manual tweaks, especially with the original 4.0 release; 4.2 may be more
polished, now.)

Once you have X configured, you can consider using a window manager (twm
is a nice, fairly cofigurable window manager that comes with XFree86---or
you can get something like fvwm that Martti mentions, or you can install
KDE or GNOME).  Window managers are just special X clients that are
allowed to control things like where windows open up, and which provide
standard ``decorations'' to windows (drag-/title-bars; sizing gadgets,
etc.).

Personally, I use twm all of the time, but as Martti says, it's a matter
of taste.  KDE is slick in some ways, but it's a resource monster.  GNOME
used to be visually more appealing than KDE, but I think that it's
back-slid (and last I tried, GNOME was not as stable as KDE).

(GNOME and KDE are both desktop environments.  I think that we may have
one or two additional desktops in pkgsrc, but we have more window
managers.  KDE includes its own window manager; GNOME doesn't have its
own, but can work with several, including twm.)


(c) You do *not* need a desktop *or* a window manager.  (Though life
without a window manager would be a bit difficult at times...I wouldn't
recommend going entirely without a window manager.)  To X, those are just
more client programs.

Also, window managers and desktops do *not* need drivers in general.  You
need drivers (or servers) for XFree86 to talk to your video card, but KDE
(etc.) talks to *X*, not to the hardware.


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