On Thu, 4 Mar 1999, Richard Rauch wrote:

>   Is it a deliberate feature to not support ``-r'', or is it a bug?
>   (If the former, then the man page should be updated...)
> 
> I wouldn't have guessed that it would be deliberate, save that the
> GNU/LINUX lpr man page seems to have a low opinion of supporting ``-r'';
> so, I wondered if perhaps they had a good reason for their attitude, and
> our own lpr might have been modified by someone of a like mind?

Well, I don't care to speculate on what's "deliberate." (Deliberate by
who? Everyone? Anyone who wants to could supply a patch, or file a
pr.) I could be wrong, but I seem to remember seeing something about
this in the bug database. I'm not that all interested in this one, but
you might care to search the database for yourself at
<http://www.netbsd.org/Misc/send-pr.html>.

> > > > > As far as I can tell, lprm doesn't do what it is supposed to do.  The
> > > > > oddity of my system is that the ``ps'' and ``lp'' printers both directly
> > > > > drive the same printer harder (``ps'' doesn't pass it off through ``lp''; 
> > > > > perhaps a mistake, but it shouldn't affect the queues, should it?).  The
> > > > > two printers have seperate /var/spool/output queue directories. 

No, I'm sorry. I don't see any benefit to having two spools for one
printer. What does that do for you that one spool can't do, assuming
you can get it to work at all?

> What dvips does by default depends on how you configured it under
> texconfig.  At least, so texconfig claims.  I confess that I trusted
> texconfig & haven't experimented...

>From `info dvips':

  To use dvips, simply type

     dvips foo

where `foo.dvi' is the output of TeX that you want to print.  If dvips
has been installed correctly, the document should come out of your
default printer.

My build of teTeX-0.4p8, from the package system, does exactly that.