On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 5:19 PM, Gregory P. Ennis <PoMec@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> I am a new hylafax+ user and other than the ghostscript problem I am
> very impressed. Hylafax+ does allow you to control the location of
> ghostscript so once I get it compiled I should be able to point it to
> the correct version. Instead of using the Fedora RPM, I am going to
> compile it and try to route the files to a different location. I really
> screwed up a different system trying to do an rpm install with a Fedora
> module with a different piece of software. I am a little gun shy about
> doing that again.
>
> I am using Hylafax+ on CentOS 5.9 to replace a vsifax system installed
> on SCO. If I can get ghostscript 9.07 installed properly this will be a
> very good replacement.
>
> If any of you have additional suggestions, I sure appreciate your help.
It doesn't help with this particular problem, but is there some reason
for using CentOS 5.x vs. 6.x?
Dear Les,
Please accept my apology for not responding to your not a long time ago.
I was very disappointed in that I could not get Centos 6 to boot on this
machine. It is a SuperMicro with a SCSI drive. In fact, I could not
even get Centos 5.9 to boot on this machine as well, I had to go back to
5.0 to even get the installation started. The problem was related to
not being able to boot from a SCSI drive. I was very surprised.
In my research about this, I got the impression that SCSI drives were
not going to be supported beyond 5.0 (not sure but I think the cut off
was 5.2).
Greg
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
