Am Mi, den 15.03.2006 schrieb Chin um 2:23:
> Hi all,
>
> Am I right to say that I have to install hylafax-4.2.5-1fc3.x86_64.rpm rather
> than hylafax-4.2.5-1rhel4.i386.rpm because the rpm command failed if tried to
> install the RHEL version. I am running an updated CentOS 4.2 x86_64.
> Thank you.
>
> Regards,
> Chin
Generally you can run i386 software on x86_64 arch of CentOS. If you opt
for the x86_64 only alternate, then I wouldn't choose the FC3 RPM of
HylaFax as FC3 isn't identical with RHEL4, just a base for it's
development. I would take the SRC.RPM
ftp://ftp.hylafax.org/binary/linux/redhat/SRPMS/hylafax-4.2.5-1rhel4.src.rpm
and "rpmbuild --rebuild --target x86_64 hylafax-4.2.5-1rhel4.src.rpm"
it.
Alexander
--
Alexander Dalloz | Enger, Germany | GPG http://pgp.mit.edu 0xB366A773
legal statement: http://www.uni-x.org/legal.html
Fedora Core 2 GNU/Linux on Athlon with kernel 2.6.11-1.35_FC2smp
Serendipity 22:00:58 up 4 days, 23:48, load average: 0.50, 0.48, 0.43
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
Url : http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20060318/16ef470c/attachment.bin
