Just my 0.02, for what they are worth: I don't believe that, realistically speaking, any of the commercial UN*X vendors (Sun, IBM, HP, to name the ones with the largest market share) will ever agree to redesign their kernels. I believe that relying on a kernel dependent implementation will essentially shut KDE out of any kernel, but those which support such facilities. This would probably mean Linux exclusively. Would this type of requirement be beneficial to KDE in the long run ? IMHO, it wouldn't. I am not trying to start an ideological flamewar. But i am afraid that enforcing such a requirement will inevitably degenerate into an ideological flamewar, and will open KDE to criticism. And it will become extremely difficult to defend KDE against such criticism. Yes, one could summarily dismiss these commercial implementations as being "insanely retarded", or some other moniker. However, i would humbly suggest that claming "KDE doesn't support because is insanely retarded" doesn't really achieve anything useful, short-term, or long-term. 0.02. --Stefan ----- On Saturday 14 August 2004 13:57, George Staikos wrote: > Is KDE going to require Linux from now on? -- Stefan Teleman 'Nobody Expects the Spanish Inquisition' steleman@nyc.rr.com -Monty Python