Am Dienstag, 6. September 2011, 17:55:54 schrieb Alan Mackenzie: > Hi, Michael. > > On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 01:02:59PM -0400, Michael Mol wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 12:49 PM, Alan Mackenzie <a...@muc.de> wrote: > > > Hi, Paul. > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 11:28:16AM -0500, Paul Hartman wrote: > > >> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Dale <rdalek1...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> > This is rather odd. For the longest, every time I had a cups > > >> > update, I had to delete my printers then add them back again. > > >> > It would not print until I did so. > > >> > > >> I have to do that every time I plug my printer in... > > >> > > >> I print so infrequently, every time I want to print I turn the > > >> printer > > >> on and plug it into my PC, and then spend 25 minutes trying to > > >> make it > > >> work with CUPS again. > > > > > > I also print infrequently. I turn my printer on, and it simply > > > works, > > > straight away (after warming up; it's a laser printer). > > > > > > However, I use lprng, not cups. It's good that we have a choice > > > over > > > what software we use, isn't it? ;-( > > > > It could be that IPP is just becoming the preferred protocol, and other > > print queue managing protocols are going the way of Gopher. > > Preferred by whom? Firefox, for example, manages lprng just fine. It's > really not a big deal supporting an extra spooler interface, particularly > a simple one.
If it's no big deal, why don't you provide patches to LibreOffice? > > Is there a simple IPP daemon which could wrap lprng? > > Adding a layer of complexity to a daemon to cope with added complexity in > a client program? I doubt it. It sounds like madness. lprng-ipp seems to implement that madness. Michael
