Re: [hylafax-users] contradictory installation info on hylafax.org

["Wilmes, Rusty" <RWilmes@facey.com>]

Lee,

Based on your recommedation.... 

(Instead I would recommend that you use CVS
(http://www.hylafax.org/cvs.html) and patch it with the last patches posted
on these bugs:
http://bugs.hylafax.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62
http://bugs.hylafax.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81
http://bugs.hylafax.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88
http://bugs.hylafax.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90
http://bugs.hylafax.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91 )

......I got the CVS downloaded into /usr/local and upped libtiff to 3.5.5-2
from the rpm on rpmfind.net (I always get timeouts on Redhats site)

But NOW Im at a loss.  I've never installed anything but tarballs and RPMs.
How do I get the patches that you linked to below and how do I apply them?  

Thanks,
Rusty

-----Original Message-----
From: Lee Howard [mailto:faxguy@deanox.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2001 9:08 AM
To: Wilmes, Rusty; 'hylafax-users@hylafax.org'
Subject: Re: [hylafax-users] contradictory installation info on
hylafax.org


At 06:57 AM 1/23/01 -0800, Wilmes, Rusty wrote:

>The docs on hylafax.org seem to contradict themselves r.e. the version
>of libtiff that's required.
>
>http://www.hylafax.org/howto/install.html is the page I'm referring to.
>
>First it says at the top of section 2 that...
>
> "Be aware that if you intend to install and run without patching
>HylaFAX 4.1beta2 or any earlier version it is imperitive that you use
>libtiff 3.4."

Yes, HylaFAX 4.1beta2 *requires* libtiff 3.4.

>Then in section 2.2.2 it says that for the same Hylafax package libtiff
must
>be
>"3.5.5 or better"
>
>
>Which of these is correct?

Both of them are correct.  The HylaFAX RPMs are generated currently from
CVS snapshots rather than the 4.1beta2 tarball because new version releases
are slow to come-by because of all the other platforms that need to be
supported in a new release.  Technically the HylaFAX RPMs are not using the
same HylaFAX source code as "4.1beta2", and these CVS sources support
libtiff-3.5 also.  Since the RPM is built on a system with libtiff-3.5 it
is required that systems on which the RPM is installed also have
libtiff-3.5.  libtiff-3.5.4 had bugs in it that would interfere with the
proper appearance of short-page faxes, so it is a recommended upgrade to
move to libtiff-3.5.5.  Even RedHat suggests this, as it is on either their
errata list or their bugfix/upgrade list.

>I'm at libtiff version 3.5.4-5 on a Redhat 6.2 installation.  Do I need
>to revert to 3.4 or upgrade to 3.5.5?

You don't *need* to do anything, and the RPM should install dandy.
However, my recommendation to you at the moment, until Darren releases a
new RPM, to not use 4.1beta2-8rh6 because it does not install the correct
init scripts.  If you do use the 8rh6 RPM, then you need to get the init
scripts from the 2rh7 RPM.  Instead I would recommend that you use CVS
(http://www.hylafax.org/cvs.html) and patch it with the last patches posted
on these bugs:
http://bugs.hylafax.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62
http://bugs.hylafax.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81
http://bugs.hylafax.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88
http://bugs.hylafax.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90
http://bugs.hylafax.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91

Patching the source in this case is not critical to the proper
functionality of HylaFAX - but it does fix some documentation problems and
adds a few features.

Or, better yet, grab the 4.1beta2-2rh7 SRPM, make any appropriate changes
to the spec file (notably in the "requires" and "version" sections),
replace the tarball with CVS, and build your own RPM.

Lee.

>Thanks in advance!
>Rusty
>rwilmes@facey.com
>


____________________ HylaFAX(tm) Users Mailing List _______________________
 To unsub: mail -s unsubscribe hylafax-users-request@hylafax.org < /dev/null