Subject: Re: why separate system and pkg hierarchies? (was: /usr/pkg/etc/rc.d/*)
To: gabriel rosenkoetter <email@example.com>
From: Greg A. Woods <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 03/20/2003 21:41:19
[ On Thursday, March 20, 2003 at 20:54:49 (-0500), gabriel rosenkoetter wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: why separate system and pkg hierarchies? (was: /usr/pkg/etc/rc.d/*)
> On Thu, Mar 20, 2003 at 08:09:51PM -0500, Greg A. Woods wrote:
> > What you're saying is really logically no different than if there were
> > also "bsdlpd" package and you want to have it installed in parallel with
> > CUPS and LPrng.
> But we don't HAVE a packaged system
But we will (hopefully!) have a packaged system so I think planning
around it is rather counter-productive.
> and we have a real problem of
> name space conflicts, which will lead to overwriting on updating the
No, not if you fix the CUPS package to avoid such conflicts.... There
shouldn't ben any fundamental problem with the package prefixing all the
CUPS commands with "cups-" or such. You could even simply avoid
installing the BSD-compatible commands and simply use the SysV ones
> We also have a graceful fix ALREADY WRITTEN in the mailwrapper
But you/we don't _REALLY_NEED_ a wrapper for just "lpr"....
> Until the Golden Age of syspkg's graces us all, maybe we could use
> this as a work-around for programs like sendmail and lpd where real
> users of the real NetBSD operating system have a real problem?
Why not rename the CUPS commands to be unique and set it up with its
lpd-alike service listening on [127.0.0.1]:515 and then set up a simple
remote printer at "localhost" in /etc/printcap and run "lpd -s" so it
I.e. don't try to replace the base system's lpd et al with CUPS -- just
make it interface transparently to CUPS.
Greg A. Woods
+1 416 218-0098; <email@example.com>; <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Planix, Inc. <email@example.com>; VE3TCP; Secrets of the Weird <firstname.lastname@example.org>