![]() |
On Mon, Aug 30, 1999 at 09:14:31AM -0400, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: > > In my view, people should not create binary RPMs of beta software. > > Please take your questions to the maintainer of that RPM. If software > > is truly beta, it should only be used by people with the system management > > skills to do first line diagnosis. > > Unfortunately, David, RedHat Linux evolves so fast that older RPM's > are difficult to install and work with. And the 4.0pl... source > bundles *WILL NOT* compile under RedHat 6. Darren's RPM's really are > the easiest and best way for users to get it as close to right > as is possible so far. Indeed. I've just installed the 4.1b1 rpm over RH6 with the factory GhostScript (which, BTW, is _newer_ than the build on ftp.hylafax.com, but one build number). The install went _almost_ perfectly (the faxsetup script wants /usr/bin/mawk, but was happy with a symlink to /bin/awk), and it ran out of the box. With a Sportster 28k8, believe it or not -- set it up as 2.0. Haven't faxed to a _lot_ of test machines yet, but it worked right on the first one. > > Generally hylafax is documented on the basis that the user is a > > traditional Unix system manager; anyone producing binary versions > > has a responsibility to write additional documentation suitable for > > plug and play users. > > Hey! We're trying! Remember that this is freeware: finding extra time > to write updated manual pages is sometimes difficult for the people > doing real work on it. Boys, boys... :-) I consider you both Hats on this list; play nice. I concur, though, that some user level docos would be nice; I'd like to think I can find time to write some, but I'll certainly make time to edit anything someone else writes, if asked. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth jra@baylink.com Member of the Technical Staff Buy copies of The New Hackers Dictionary. The Suncoast Freenet Give them to all your friends. Tampa Bay, Florida http://www.ccil.org/jargon/ +1 813 790 7592