On Fri 15 Nov 2019 at 12:44:16 -0000, Dan Purgert wrote: > mick crane wrote: > > On 2019-11-14 23:52, Dan Purgert wrote: > > > >>> What is more interesting is why a user thinks that the LPD protocol > >>> gives them something that IPP doesn't. > >> > >> Who said that LPR/LPD gave people "something" that IPP doesn't?
My musing could be seen as a question exploring whether the LPD protocol has any advantages over the IPP protocol. > > I'm not really sure about what happens. > > Is it that a CUPS server translates what it receives from client to > > sequence of instructions printer understands ? > > Certain on client > > > > " mytext | lpr " > > > > worked, which could be handy. > > Yeah, CUPS does provide hooks for some commands (similarly to how say > postfix or exim provide 'sendmail(tm)'). > > This entire discourse between Brian and myself started with a question > to the effect of "what will 'we' (presumably 'Dan' and 'Brian') do The "we" was intended to encompass all users of the Debian printing system. > if/when CUPS removes PPD support for our old printers?" ( MID > <z1kea-1m...@gated-at.bofh.it> ). I responded with a crack about LPRng > being the "solution" to continue supporting the old stuff (and, in the > case of 'new stuff' that still supports the old LPR/LPD protocols; why > bother mucking around with changes I don't "need" to make). There is no "if" about? When? After CUPS 2.3. A couple of years? -- Brian.
