Re: file descriptors consumed by printing

2003-03-01 Thread Vance Lankhaar
What about adding a value to the printing param? -> "printing = disabled" Though, I guess it would only have an effect when put in the global section. Vance Lankhaar On Sat, 2003-03-01 at 10:19, Richard Sharpe wrote: > Hi, > > In some recent work that I was doing, I detected that Samba uses a

Re: file descriptors consumed by printing

2003-03-02 Thread Richard Sharpe
On Sat, 1 Mar 2003, Vance Lankhaar wrote: > What about adding a value to the printing param? -> "printing = > disabled" This seems like a good way to do it. Does anyone have any objections if I do so? > Though, I guess it would only have an effect when put in the global > section. > > Vance

Re: file descriptors consumed by printing

2003-03-02 Thread Tim Potter
On Sun, Mar 02, 2003 at 06:54:37AM -0800, Richard Sharpe wrote: > On Sat, 1 Mar 2003, Vance Lankhaar wrote: > > > What about adding a value to the printing param? -> "printing = > > disabled" > > This seems like a good way to do it. Does anyone have any objections if I > do so? Why do we need

Re: file descriptors consumed by printing

2003-03-02 Thread Richard Sharpe
On Mon, 3 Mar 2003, Tim Potter wrote: > On Sun, Mar 02, 2003 at 06:54:37AM -0800, Richard Sharpe wrote: > > > On Sat, 1 Mar 2003, Vance Lankhaar wrote: > > > > > What about adding a value to the printing param? -> "printing = > > > disabled" > > > > This seems like a good way to do it. Does an

Re: file descriptors consumed by printing

2003-03-02 Thread Richard Sharpe
On Mon, 3 Mar 2003, Tim Potter wrote: > On Sun, Mar 02, 2003 at 06:54:37AM -0800, Richard Sharpe wrote: > > > On Sat, 1 Mar 2003, Vance Lankhaar wrote: > > > > > What about adding a value to the printing param? -> "printing = > > > disabled" > > > > This seems like a good way to do it. Does an

Re: file descriptors consumed by printing

2003-03-02 Thread Tim Potter
On Sun, Mar 02, 2003 at 10:10:53PM -0800, Richard Sharpe wrote: > > > This seems like a good way to do it. Does anyone have any objections if I > > > do so? > > > > Why do we need it? Just call lp_default_server_announce() and check if > > the SV_TYPE_PRINTQ_SERVER bit is set. If no print shar

Re: file descriptors consumed by printing

2003-03-02 Thread Richard Sharpe
On Mon, 3 Mar 2003, Tim Potter wrote: > On Sun, Mar 02, 2003 at 10:10:53PM -0800, Richard Sharpe wrote: > > > > > This seems like a good way to do it. Does anyone have any objections if I > > > > do so? > > > > > > Why do we need it? Just call lp_default_server_announce() and check if > > > th

Re: file descriptors consumed by printing

2003-03-02 Thread jra
On Sun, Mar 02, 2003 at 10:25:27PM -0800, Richard Sharpe wrote: > On Mon, 3 Mar 2003, Tim Potter wrote: > > It's fixed in HEAD. > > Yeah, well someone forgot their janitorial duties :-) I take it that means 3.0 and HEAD will be seeing your cli_XXX 64 bit fixes shortly. :-) :-) :-). Jeremy.

Re: file descriptors consumed by printing

2003-03-03 Thread Tim Potter
On Sun, Mar 02, 2003 at 10:25:27PM -0800, Richard Sharpe wrote: > > > > > This seems like a good way to do it. Does anyone have any objections if I > > > > > do so? > > > > > > > > Why do we need it? Just call lp_default_server_announce() and check if > > > > the SV_TYPE_PRINTQ_SERVER bit is se

Re: file descriptors consumed by printing

2003-03-03 Thread jra
On Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 12:46:28PM +1100, Tim Potter wrote: > > There's an interesting story about that. (-: At the time I fixed this > problem we were in "don't touch the 2.2 branch unless it is a critical > bug fix", and also in "this will be the last version of 2.2 for sure" > mode. > > I gu

Re: file descriptors consumed by printing

2003-03-04 Thread Gerald (Jerry) Carter
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sun, 2 Mar 2003, Richard Sharpe wrote: > On Mon, 3 Mar 2003, Tim Potter wrote: > > > On Sun, Mar 02, 2003 at 10:10:53PM -0800, Richard Sharpe wrote: > > > > > > > This seems like a good way to do it. Does anyone have any objections if I > > > >