Hi Ludo, Am Mittwoch, den 13.01.2021, 12:28 +0100 schrieb Ludovic Courtès: > Hi Leo, > > Leo Prikler <leo.prik...@student.tugraz.at> skribis: > > > it has come to my attention due to the recent reporting of #45830 > > and > > some conversation in IRC, that cups-service-type adds an lp group, > > which is already defined in %base-groups. Since both share the > > same > > definition, this is not too big an issue, but it prohibits us from > > using a hard error for #45770. > > > > I can currently think of two solutions: Either remove the lp group > > from > > cups-service-type or remove it from base-groups. Neither sounds > > particularly awesome. Perhaps we could also delete identical > > duplicates before asserting that there are none for #45770, but > > that > > sounds like a little much effort. Any ideas how else to solve > > this? > > I’d be pragmatic here: > > 1. Ignore duplicates that are identical (don’t report them). Is that still not a problem, because either definition could change?
> 2. Remove “lp” from %base-groups since it has no use without CUPS > (right?). That's probably true, but I fear, that some have already added "lp" to their config.scm. Would that cause issues? We could also add CUPS to %base-services or %desktop-services in some way, but that would probably cause issues with configurations, that already have it. Regards, Leo
