Bug#848404: cups-browsed: CreateRemoteCUPSPrinterQueues has no effect

2016-12-17 Thread Till Kamppeter
The servers of the Linux Foundation are back online and so I have committed rev. 7583 and also released cups-filters 1.13.1. Till

Bug#848404: cups-browsed: CreateRemoteCUPSPrinterQueues has no effect

2016-12-17 Thread Till Kamppeter
The problem with cups-browsed erroring out when CreateRemoteCUPSPrinterQueues=No is set and queues from the previous cups-browsed session did not get removed I have solved now. The fix is intended to be BZR rev. 7583, but the servers of the Linux Foundation went completely down, so I attach

Bug#848404: cups-browsed: CreateRemoteCUPSPrinterQueues has no effect

2016-12-17 Thread Brian Potkin
On Sat 17 Dec 2016 at 11:21:35 -0200, Till Kamppeter wrote: > If you have observed the problem with the current BZR state of cups-filters. > Please try I had already tried this when testing the fix for #836955, which is partly why I submitted this report. However, thinking my testing may not

Bug#848404: cups-browsed: CreateRemoteCUPSPrinterQueues has no effect

2016-12-17 Thread Till Kamppeter
If you have observed the problem with the current BZR state of cups-filters. Please try sudo systemctl stop cups-browsed check whether all cups-browsed-generated queues have gone away and run sudo systemctl start cups-browsed Is the setting now obeyed? Did all the generated queues go away

Bug#848404: cups-browsed: CreateRemoteCUPSPrinterQueues has no effect

2016-12-17 Thread Till Kamppeter
I have also fixed #848167 with the commit yesterday, so in the current BZR state the problem of the queues not being removed is fixed. Does the problem you mention in this bug occur with the current BZR state (rev. 7580)? Till

Bug#848404: cups-browsed: CreateRemoteCUPSPrinterQueues has no effect

2016-12-17 Thread Brian Potkin
Package: cups-browsed Version: 1.13.0-2 Severity: normal Tags: upstream Discovered remote queues are always shown whether or not CreateRemoteCUPSPrinterQueues is "Yes" or "No". Would this be related to #848167? Regards, -- Brian.