Re: flexfax: FW: Hylafax - faxq unable to exec faxsend

[darren@hylafax.org]

>>>>> On Sat, 23 Jan 1999, "WHG" == William H. Gilmore wrote:

  WHG> All,

  WHG> I finally gave up on attempting to get the RPM to work on my RH5.2
  WHG> machine.  I have been corresponding with another person who succesfully
  WHG> installed it.  In both of our cases, our configurations were created
  WHG> through the use of "standard" (whatever that means) RPMs.  In tracing
  WHG> through and RPM query on our respective machines, I could find not
  WHG> difference in libraries or external program depended upon by Hylafax.

[snip]

  WHG> I'll offer the following advice for RedHat users.  IF THE DEVELOPED RPM
  WHG> DOES NOT WORK AT FIRST BLUSH, ERASE IT AND COMPILE FROM SCRATCH!!!

  WHG> I would like to challenge someone to take ownership of Hylafax from
  WHG> a Linux perspective.  I realize that we cannot expect SGI to address
  WHG> since it would be a definite conflict of interest.  I will not volunteer
  WHG> myself because I am much more of a SysAdm than a programmer.  However, I
  WHG> will volunteer to help with testing, documentation, and the like.

<vent>
Look buster, if you're going to badmouth my work publicly, perhaps you could approach me privately in a slightly more constructive manner?
<\vent>

Seriously, I am aware of NO, ZERO, NADA showstoppers with the present RPM besides a few dependencies which might confuse the newbies out there. And if you've been reading this list at all, as you should before declaring the Linux support dead in the water, then you'll be pretty familiar with the simple fix to that confusion.

I'm extremely keen to promote HylaFAX from a linux perspective, and I welcome your CONSTRUCTIVE comments on how I may improve the present state of affairs. For instance, a detailed description of the problems you have had with the RPM, the reasons why you were unable to compile using the SRPM, etc etc.

A new release of the RPM is imminent, but I'm really baffled by the tone of your message. The Linux RPM is well supported, I feel, between my efforts on the side and those of the list in public, and I think it's a good piece of work. I'm curious to know why you feel otherwise.

-Darren