Subject: Re: lpwrapper
To: Frederick Bruckman <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Julio Merino <email@example.com>
Date: 03/20/2003 20:12:04
On Thu, 20 Mar 2003 12:06:16 -0600 (CST)
Frederick Bruckman <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > Okay, you put symlinks in /usr/bin and /usr/sbin. Then, you rebuild
> > your NetBSD system and update it. Guess what happens with your
> > symlinks/binaries? They are lost, overriden or whatever.
> Agreed, it's a mess. The blame lies with the CUPS so-and-so's for
> naming the utilities the same as the default ones -- the README.txt
Grrrr why did I ever mention cups? This is not a problem specific with
cups. It is with *any* daemon meant to replace lpd. Just checked the
LPRng package, and it installs the same binaries, so it has the same
problem. And if there is any other alternative, it may be possible
affected by this.
> explains that you're *expected* to replace your system utilities with
I don't want to remove or change anything in the base system, as it will
be overriden in the next update (no, I don't want to tweak my makefiles
nor sources). Using a wrapper is like "replacing your system utilities
with theirs", but in a clean way.
> I'm still afraid that your suggestion will lead to additional
> support demands, to the detriment of the very fine (if slightly dated)
> in-tree lpd.
Like what? I can't think of anything else needed... (my printing
knowledge on *nix is "poor").
> BTW, I committed a change to the cups package to link -lcrypt in ahead
> of -lcrypto. That would be great if you could test auth w/ blowfish
> hashes, and revert your change to the MESSAGE file if it works.
Done, thanks for fixing it.
Julio M. Merino Vidal <email@example.com>
The NetBSD Project - http://www.NetBSD.org/