Re: another look at release-critical bugs: lpr
On Fri, Jun 12, 1998 at 12:56:42PM +0200, Paul Slootman wrote: > On Wed 03 Jun 1998, Craig Sanders wrote: > > On Sat, 30 May 1998, Jay Wardle wrote: > > > > > [...Raul wrote...] > > > > If this can't be fixed easily, perhaps we ought to promote lprng to > > > > standard and demote lpr to optional. Yes, I know that bug-for-bug > > > > compatability is a nice thing, but in my experience lprng is superior to > > > > lpr. > > If you take a look at the bug report, you'll see that there's a > workaround already in place for this bug, but the maintainer left the > bug report intact because he wants to find a cleaner solution. > > Hence this discussion of lpr <-> lprng is pretty much off-topic, and > distracting to the point in question. > > He probably should have changed the priority to wishlist, however. I did change the severity to wishlist. Adam Klein -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: another look at release-critical bugs: lpr
Paul Slootman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If you take a look at the bug report, you'll see that there's a > workaround already in place for this bug, but the maintainer left the > bug report intact because he wants to find a cleaner solution. > > Hence this discussion of lpr <-> lprng is pretty much off-topic, and > distracting to the point in question. If you look a bit closer, you'll see that the first message about a workaround was a followup to my suggestion of using lprng as an alternative. -- Raul -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: another look at release-critical bugs: lpr
On Wed 03 Jun 1998, Craig Sanders wrote: > On Sat, 30 May 1998, Jay Wardle wrote: > > > [...Raul wrote...] > > > If this can't be fixed easily, perhaps we ought to promote lprng to > > > standard and demote lpr to optional. Yes, I know that bug-for-bug > > > compatability is a nice thing, but in my experience lprng is superior to > > > lpr. If you take a look at the bug report, you'll see that there's a workaround already in place for this bug, but the maintainer left the bug report intact because he wants to find a cleaner solution. Hence this discussion of lpr <-> lprng is pretty much off-topic, and distracting to the point in question. He probably should have changed the priority to wishlist, however. Paul Slootman -- home: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | work: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.wurtel.demon.nl | Murphy Software, Enschede, the Netherlands -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: another look at release-critical bugs: lpr
On Sat, 30 May 1998, Jay Wardle wrote: > [...Raul wrote...] > > If this can't be fixed easily, perhaps we ought to promote lprng to > > standard and demote lpr to optional. Yes, I know that bug-for-bug > > compatability is a nice thing, but in my experience lprng is superior to > > lpr. > > > > -- > > Raul > > In my (admittedly limited) experience, lpr is superior to lprng. Both > a friend and I could not get lprng setup on our systems. It requires > a lot of configuration work. We had both spent a significant amount of > time with lprng, and lpr was a snap. we have the exact opposite experience then. i found lprng to be a breeze - the package basically configures itself, especially if you also install magicfilter. I don't use lpr on any system any more. if i find anyone on my network has installed lpr (i have several debian users at work now...converting them was easy, once they realised it was convert or perishmwahahahaha!) then i remove it and replace it with lpr. > lpr is clearly the best choice for most of the small system users. i disagree. i find that the integration between lprng and magicfilter makes it the best choice for anyone who just wants something that works "out of the box" lprng, magicfilter, gs (or gs-aladdin), and enscript : THE printing suite for linux systems. craig -- craig sanders -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
