![]() |
On Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 05:25:52PM +1200, Michael Doerner wrote: > > You know, I can't imagine any client-side environment where you could > > view a PDF file where you *couldn't* view a TIFF file directly, with > > about the same about of "install-a-plugin" labor at worst. > > > > I haven't seen the new faxrcvd script you mention in person, but can > > someone explain to me whyinhell you'd bother? Just attach the TIFF > > directly... > > maybe I took a bad approach (?) but I am looking for a format that I can > view at this and most other Windows-PCs with quite a standard installation, > no additional software needed. No... I wasn't dissing you. I was dissing whomever decided that wrapping a TIFF into a PDF was a better default approach than just attaching it directly, which I don't think was you. > To be able to open/view the tif files, I applied an Internet Explorer plugin > which is called "alternatiff" (http://www.mieweb.com/alternatiff/). I don't > know which other standard applications under Windows would be able to open > the tif's, IE without that plugin couldn't do it here? No, the browsers won't open TIFF's directly. But, as you note, there are plugins that will; and that's a much lower overhead approach. You could also turn them into PNG's from TIFF format, which would likely also work; I think ImageMagick has a tool for that. > I want to be able to forward these received faxes to other users who should > be able to open these (ideally) without any need to install another > software. I even would like to open the received faxes from remote through > webmail running on our host (E-smith server). > > On the other hand, Acrobat Reader is nowadays almost a standard on every > machine, therefore my approach for the pdf format. Well... > Is there an easier way to achieve that? No, not really. If you want to take AcroRead as a given, then it would probably be easier, from a deployment standpoint. I don't think acroread's penetration is as high as I think you think it is. Imaging should read those attachments, too, though, I'd expect. No? > At http://www.hylafax.org/howto/install.php there are the different > installation requirements for the various OS or distributions. For Redhat 7 > it tells you the different packages required i.e.. libtiff, ghostscript, > etc. The last in the row mentioned there is "libgr-devel-2.0.13 or better" > and the remark there for RH7 says: > > " * on RedHat 7.0 the applicable packages are named nebpbm instead of > libgr." > > I couldn't find any nebpbm but instead I found netpbm which I believe is > just a misspelling there. More important for me is the question where this > package is used/needed for since I didn't come across an obvious > requirement? So I still haven't applied a "netpbm" RPM on the machine. Could > that be part of my problem (I doubt)? Damifino. That is almost certainly a Lee Howard question, and no doubt he's already answered it, further down my mailbox.... if not, he likely will when he wakes up next. :-) Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth jra@baylink.com Member of the Technical Staff Baylink The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Florida http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 804 5015 ____________________ HylaFAX(tm) Users Mailing List _______________________ To unsub: mail -s unsubscribe hylafax-users-request@hylafax.org < /dev/null