From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1R10aI-0007T7-Tt for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 06 Sep 2011 18:41:23 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 970E121C30B; Tue, 6 Sep 2011 18:41:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.22]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3960121C0A5 for ; Tue, 6 Sep 2011 18:39:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 06 Sep 2011 18:39:58 -0000 Received: from p5B0843EA.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO pc.localnet) [91.8.67.234] by mail.gmx.net (mp014) with SMTP; 06 Sep 2011 20:39:58 +0200 X-Authenticated: #13997268 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+MBs8AdeuMjqS29ffTo+mKvwzbPyvFfte9NAO1fu 4eyX5lVvF7rnQF From: Michael Schreckenbauer To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild? Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2011 20:40 +0200 Message-ID: <2674986.sdC8SStjOO@pc> User-Agent: KMail/4.7.0 (Linux/2.6.38-gentoo; KDE/4.7.0; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <20110906174848.GD9867@acm.acm> References: <87ehzuiu1y.fsf@newton.gmurray.org.uk> <2474748.BxeZ24raHv@pc> <20110906174848.GD9867@acm.acm> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 6f82c639f688ca8ad27c973266180244 Am Dienstag, 6. September 2011, 17:48:49 schrieb Alan Mackenzie: > Hi, Michael. > > On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 07:03:19PM +0200, Michael Schreckenbauer wrote: > > Am Dienstag, 6. September 2011, 16:43:39 schrieb Alan Mackenzie: > > > Is that right? How about it being saner to conform to standardised > > > interfaces, protocols and formats? > > > > How about IPP? > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Printing_Protocol > > > > Oh wait... that's what cups is using. > > Ah yes, a standard. So we have the choice between all the IPP > implementations. That's cups and, ... err - is there another one? Well, there's lprng-ipp. Not in portage though http://jointlab.upol.cz/~michale/projects/lprng-ipp/ For other OSes there are other implementations available. > But why should I have to use an over the top bloated "Internet" protocol? > I've got one single printer on the end of a USB cable. I want a simple > spooler, as simple as possible and not simpler. > > > > No, the sane alternative is to use the `lpr' command, possibly > > > augmented by special arguments for particular spoolers, but always > > > having a fallback to standard `lpr'. That way, everybody's happy. > > > Even me. ;-)> > > How about the lpr command provided by cups? > > Does it not work for you? > > I believe it did work for me for the short time I had cups installed. > More pertinent is, why won't the lpr command work for LibreOffice? Because LibreOffice uses ipp for printing. Michael