Re: Built-in lpr vs CUPS
At 2004-05-10T12:38:54Z, Kai Grossjohann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: This sounds like a good idea. I will do this now, so I just have to remember to build CUPS again after the world. Not really. The NO_LPR=yes flag tells the make system not to build or install any of the lpr files again, ever, until you unset it. Once you do this, CUPS will be your lpr for as long as you want. -- Kirk Strauser 94 outdated ports on the box, 94 outdated ports. Portupgrade one, an hour 'til done, 82 outdated ports on the box. pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Built-in lpr vs CUPS
Rob [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: How about this in /etc/make.conf: CUPS_OVERWRITE_BASE=yes NO_LPR=yes This sounds like a good idea. I will do this now, so I just have to remember to build CUPS again after the world. Thanks! Kai ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Built-in lpr vs CUPS
The default setup is to include /usr/bin before /usr/local/bin in $PATH. This means that entering lpr -Pfoo doesn't work for printing on my machine, I have to say /usr/local/bin/lpr -Pfoo. It is obvious that I could change $PATH to mention /usr/local/bin before /usr/bin, but is that the right solution? Surely there is a reason for /etc/login.conf to mention /usr/bin first. Any thoughts are very much appreciated. Kai ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Built-in lpr vs CUPS
On Sat, May 08, 2004 at 06:55:54PM +0200, Kai Grossjohann wrote: The default setup is to include /usr/bin before /usr/local/bin in $PATH. This means that entering lpr -Pfoo doesn't work for printing on my machine, I have to say /usr/local/bin/lpr -Pfoo. It is obvious that I could change $PATH to mention /usr/local/bin before /usr/bin, but is that the right solution? Surely there is a reason for /etc/login.conf to mention /usr/bin first. Most of the system assumes it's using the utilities that come with it: ie. the contents of /usr/bin. Equivalently named programs could well be installed into /usr/local/bin, and those need not behave exactly the same, so for consistencies' sake, having /usr/bin first is generally better. However, that's not always what's required, and putting /usr/local/bin before /usr/bin in your path might be the right solution for certain user accounts. (Real users, not system ones) Any thoughts are very much appreciated. An alternative is to set up some shell aliases for those commands: % alias lpr /usr/local/bin/lpr Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 26 The Paddocks Savill Way PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Marlow Tel: +44 1628 476614 Bucks., SL7 1TH UK pgp7KBrMTroeG.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Built-in lpr vs CUPS
On Sat, 2004-05-08 at 18:55, Kai Grossjohann wrote:
The default setup is to include /usr/bin before /usr/local/bin in
$PATH. This means that entering lpr -Pfoo doesn't work for printing
on my machine, I have to say /usr/local/bin/lpr -Pfoo.
It is obvious that I could change $PATH to mention /usr/local/bin
before /usr/bin, but is that the right solution? Surely there is a
reason for /etc/login.conf to mention /usr/bin first.
Any thoughts are very much appreciated.
Hi,
from /usr/ports/print/cups-lpr/Makefile:
.ifndef CUPS_OVERWRITE_BASE
@${ECHO_MSG} ***
@${ECHO_MSG} You can define CUPS_OVERWRITE_BASE=yes in your
@${ECHO_MSG} make.conf to remove base system lpr tools from
@${ECHO_MSG} PATH search. In this case it is recommended to
@${ECHO_MSG} also define NO_LPR=yes, to not write base lpr
@${ECHO_MSG} binaries during next make world
@${ECHO_MSG} ***
That could be a solution to your problem (If I understood it correctly,
that is)
HTH,
Andreas
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Built-in lpr vs CUPS
Dear Kai, This problem can be solved by making file /usr/bin/lp* non-executable, like this: chmod -x /usr/bin/lp* regards, Robert On Sat, 08 May 2004 18:55:54 +0200 Kai Grossjohann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The default setup is to include /usr/bin before /usr/local/bin in $PATH. This means that entering lpr -Pfoo doesn't work for printing on my machine, I have to say /usr/local/bin/lpr -Pfoo. It is obvious that I could change $PATH to mention /usr/local/bin before /usr/bin, but is that the right solution? Surely there is a reason for /etc/login.conf to mention /usr/bin first. Any thoughts are very much appreciated. Kai ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Built-in lpr vs CUPS
At 2004-05-08T16:55:54Z, Kai Grossjohann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The default setup is to include /usr/bin before /usr/local/bin in $PATH. This means that entering lpr -Pfoo doesn't work for printing on my machine, I have to say /usr/local/bin/lpr -Pfoo. Is there any reason you can't delete /usr/bin/lp* and related stuff? I don't have lpr installed at all on my server. -- Kirk Strauser 94 outdated ports on the box, 94 outdated ports. Portupgrade one, an hour 'til done, 82 outdated ports on the box. pgpUq3ASxZk4e.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Built-in lpr vs CUPS
Kirk Strauser wrote: At 2004-05-08T16:55:54Z, Kai Grossjohann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The default setup is to include /usr/bin before /usr/local/bin in $PATH. This means that entering lpr -Pfoo doesn't work for printing on my machine, I have to say /usr/local/bin/lpr -Pfoo. Is there any reason you can't delete /usr/bin/lp* and related stuff? I don't have lpr installed at all on my server. How about this in /etc/make.conf: CUPS_OVERWRITE_BASE=yes NO_LPR=yes that will give directions to the cups port and the make world process. Rob. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
