On Fri, Dec 07, 2007 at 12:01:43AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Kind of reviving an old thread, but anyway:
> It also includes, but afaics, probably doesn't need to (anymore):
>
> ispell, dictionaries-common, iamerican, ibritish, wamerican
#416572: ibritish: Should not have priority standa
Kind of reviving an old thread, but anyway:
On Sun, Nov 11, 2007 at 07:12:35PM +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
> I believe it to be one of the more important bits of a standard Unix
> *desktop* installation - but this just reminds me of the fact that I'm
> quite uncomfortable with keeping a s
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, Nov 11, 2007 at 07:12:35PM +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
>> Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> Also, do we really need *any* printing system as priority: standard? It's
>>> not clear to me that printing is still really part of a
On Sun, Nov 11, 2007 at 07:12:35PM +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
> Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Also, do we really need *any* printing system as priority: standard? It's
> > not clear to me that printing is still really part of a standard Unix
> > installation, even for desk
Le lundi 12 novembre 2007 à 12:08 -0800, Steve Langasek a écrit :
> I'm assuming that re-raising the priority of lpr is not a reasonable means
> of addressing this, since that's now a completely separate printing
> implementation than the one used by default on the desktop now and AFAICS it
On Sun, Nov 11, 2007 at 01:26:25AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 21:42:52 -0800, Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > Also, do we really need *any* printing system as priority: standard?
> > It's not clear to me that printing is still really part of a standard
> > Uni
Quoting Steve Langasek ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> A few years back, Samba upstream began using CUPS as the default printing
> system whenever CUPS support was enabled. At the time, cupsys was Priority:
> optional, and lpr as the standard Unix printing interface was Priority:
> standard (or higher), so
On Sat, Nov 10, 2007 at 09:42:52PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > - Should we consider raising the priority of cupsys to standard, to take the
> > place of lpr as an available-by-default printing system on stock installs?
> The last time I looked at CUPS, it was massively more complicated than
On Sun, Nov 11, 2007 at 01:05:36AM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> Yes, it would make more sense for samba to default to CUPS, if there's
> some reason it can't probe/support both,
Well, because there's no code written to do this, and anyway supporting both
at the same time would likely be messy and res
[not subscribed to -policy, just keeping original cross-posting]
Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
> I think we may want to start thinking about getting rid of the whole
> thing and switching to something which allows us to express more complex
> importance measurements for packages. In fact, d-i and
Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Also, do we really need *any* printing system as priority: standard? It's
> not clear to me that printing is still really part of a standard Unix
> installation, even for desktop users (and it definitely isn't for
> servers).
I believe it to be one of th
On Sun, Nov 11, 2007 at 09:21:46AM +0100, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
[lpr is standard on Unix]
That works well with cups if you have the cupsys-bsd package installed.
More importantly, programs (gv comes to mind) that don't have native
printing support but use an external
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>
> Way back when, “standard” was defined as stuff that an old UNIX
> hand would say “WTF happened to that?” if it is not present on a
> default install. While I am unsure of this definition of standard still
> holds, but as an old UNIX hand I can say that if I
Russ Allbery wrote:
> Bernd Zeimetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Not sure if anybody is still using the old BSD printing stuff - at least
>> I can't see any reason why it should have a higher priority than
>> optional.
>
> I am. It's simple and it works, and CUPS seems ridiculously bloated f
On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 21:42:52 -0800, Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Also, do we really need *any* printing system as priority: standard?
> It's not clear to me that printing is still really part of a standard
> Unix installation, even for desktop users (and it definitely isn't for
> serv
Bernd Zeimetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Not sure if anybody is still using the old BSD printing stuff - at least
> I can't see any reason why it should have a higher priority than
> optional.
I am. It's simple and it works, and CUPS seems ridiculously bloated for
the only printing need I hav
Russ Allbery wrote:
> Also, do we really need *any* printing system as priority: standard? It's
> not clear to me that printing is still really part of a standard Unix
> installation, even for desktop users (and it definitely isn't for
> servers).
>
I'd guess most Desktop installations have a
lpr's standard priority nonwithstanding, CUPS has been the default print
system in Debian -- if you select the desktop or print server tasks --
for at least the last two releases. This is why popcon shows 5000 lpr
installations to 45000 cupsys installations.
Yes, it would make more sense for samba
I don't have any objections to Samba switching, but for the rest:
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> - Should we consider raising the priority of cupsys to standard, to take the
> place of lpr as an available-by-default printing system on stock installs?
The last time I looked at CUP
A few years back, Samba upstream began using CUPS as the default printing
system whenever CUPS support was enabled. At the time, cupsys was Priority:
optional, and lpr as the standard Unix printing interface was Priority:
standard (or higher), so I patched the Samba packages in Debian to default
t
20 matches
Mail list logo
