> >I haven't hacked on lpd, so I'm at the base of the learning curve.
> >How do I fix it?
> >
> >I think the real fix would be to add a new entry to printcap. If this
> >field's present, stty gets forked on the output port & sent the flags in
> >this element. Some form of unix (Linux?) does this; Ghostscript's
> >default printcap entry contains such a field. So instead of cryptic
> >bit settings which require perusal of header files, we say something
> >like "57600 raw crtscts clocal".
> 
> You mean, like the SunOS printcap entry that lets you specify stty-like
> settings (but doesn't actually _invoke_ stty)?  You know, there are patches
> laying around on the net for BSD lpr that _do_ this.  I wish I knew where
> I saw them.

Perhaps you saw them inside the NetBSD lpr/lpd?  Support for SunOS
like "ms" printcap entries was implemented at the same time it was
converted to use termios.

This was implemented by bringing some of the stty logic/code into lpd.
In my opinion, it's time for us to come up with a general API for this
and put it in libutil.  Then it can be shared among stty, lpd, and any
other programs that want/need to manipulate tty attributes.

	--jtc