I have downloaded the rpm from the Opera site. I tried running it in Opensuse 10.3 & FC 8, in both cases a libstdc++ 5 seems to be a missing dependency. But, both the OSs already have lbstdc++ 6 installed. What is the solution?

you do not name your distro pls change your control panel to assist in future posting.

2) generally speaking go to
http://www.opera.com/download/

pull down the option and choose ....other static/rpm or static/deb depending on your preferred way to install.

Thanks for the control panel tip, Aus.

I downloaded the rpm for the Opensuse 10.3 that I am on.
I can see that libstdc++.so.6 is already installed. The error message that I get is libstdc++ 5 is needed.

How different is a Static rpm?

I'm assuming from your post text that, whatever your sig says or does not say, you are primarily interested in Fedora and SuSE at this moment, and that's fine.

The easiest way of adding a package like Opera (zero cost, but not free as in 'here's the source code') is to use your distro's package manager/updater, but most distros do not enable the the 'add-ons'/'non-free' repo by default.

If you look here

en.opensuse.org/Add_Package_Repositories_to_YaST

or here

en.opensuse.org/YaST_package_repository

(or use this search (the .co.uk, you could change to your local favourite search engine if you prefer....
http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=ope...g+repositories )

you'll find information on adding repositories. In the long run, this is easier than the 'windows way', but many ex-windows users try to do this the way that they are used to, and this makes it harder for them.

If you are determined to download from the opera site (& I'm not making bad comments about Opera, but its easier for the distro themselves to keep track of which version uses which libraries and as you are finding out, that is important) you need to be sure to get the right version for your distro and version. It is very probable that Fedora and SuSE, while nominally both .rpm distros are incompatible in the exact version of libraries used, so I'd be surpriosed if one download is suitable for both.
You will have noticed when you downloaded that Opera offers different build for (list for current version):
SuSE 9.0, 9.1, 9.2, 9.3
SUSE 7.x, 8.0, 8.1, 8.2
openSUSE 10.0, 10.1, 10.2, 10.3
and
Fedora Core 5, Core 6, 7, 8
Fedora Core 4
Fedora Core 3
Fedora Core (Other versions)
so you should not presume that they are the same. Be sure to get the right version and you shouldn't have this problem.

Again, if you really need old libraries they can sometimes be run alongside the newer versions, and if you have to do this you should start with your distros package management and update facilities, but the danger is that you are getting in over head if you are a Linux neophyte. And also, if the libraries aren't available for your distro and version, Opera has done something wrong with their build, but my feeling is that you haven't selected exactly the right version of Opera
(see, for example, http://www.opera.com/download/linux/ ).

Salasi: Thank you for the descriptive how to. Opera is now on. After trying to get Opera to work with FC8 and PClinux 2007, besides Opensuse, I'd put the blame on KDE.
For the record : I had downloaded the correct version, but as you said the approach was not correct. As a Windows user, I figured software installation starts with the package. Thanks for putting it in perspective : software installation in Linux starts with the application manager!

As you'll discover, there are many ways to do things in Linux

Many prefer the automated package download mentioned above, while others (such as myself) prefer to compile from source. Feel free to experiment, research, and goof up a few times with other methodologies -- unless you're root, little you do will have an over-reaching effect on the box.

Poetics: The last statement in your post is intriguing.
I had used Mandriva 2007 for a few days, and since the labour of putting in the 6 letter root password repeatedly was annoying, I used to login as root always. I noticed that every time I booted the system, fsck would launch and correct a few errors. Does this have anything to do with the root login?

Salasi : Any good pointers/golden rules on how to tackle gz packages? I know the ./configure, make and make install steps. But some gz packages like the Opera one need a different routine. I have been unable to install opera from the gz package. The install.sh shell script doesn't accomplish much. And Flock is only available as gz, and the online readme is not helpful.

Hope I do not need to create a new post for this.

I guess you did not try the static rpm file after all?

this file...is independent of the distro.

Aus : Thanks for that info. You saved me quite a lot of downloads.
I am furious that this bit of info was not offered by Opera. If the word "static" can be used, how difficult is it to add " Distro independent"? Since I intend to try out many distros I'll henceforth be seeking static packs only.

Another 'newbie bad habit, I'm afraid. Logging in as root is to be deprecated amongst experienced users, and while I know that while 'hacking' the system you will need root privileges at some point, eventually you will need to minimise this.

If rather than logging in as root and typing commands you try:
'sudo command'
you might find that easier (ubuntu, by default, forces you to do admin that way). It should then ask you for the root password which it will remember for a while.

It shouldn't have, unless you are doing something really bad while you are logged in as root. However:
a) You are powering down correctly aren't you? You should use the power down button in your GUI rather than just switching off at the power switch
b) (And I don't suggest you change just right now, but at your next install which I'm guessing will come soon as you are still in a 'trying distros' phase): I would guess that you are using a non-journalling filesystem such as ext2. Journalling filesystems (ext3, ext4, reiser, reiser4, xfs, jfs and probably others) are more robust to problems and get through the fsck phase faster and need it less often. I would say that there is a strong presumption for using one of those.
And while this is a strong source of debate, I would say that you should choose between ext3 and reiser (3.x) as ext 4 and reiser 4 are really not quite there yet (although will be better, eventually). My personal poison is reiser, but you'll see good arguments for ext3 too, particularly if you are of the 'free as in free of any restrictions' persuasion

I really don't do this anymore. You can find online tutorials and howtos, and, as ever, google is your friend. (Other search engines exist...)

Really, I'd have second thoughts about any package that was only available as a .tar.gz and that didn't have either its own readme that explained things adequately or pointed you at a general tutorial. I wonder what the more general support is like? Maybe the package has a support discussion somewhere?