Should LPR be the standard printer daemon?
Adam J. Klein writes:
> This message follows up on the previous LPR thread. Until I get a
> reasonably maintainable and definately secure version of LPR int the
> distributions, why don't we make LPRng the standard lpd, and move LPR to
> optional or extra? One problem might be, and since I don't use lprng, I
> don't know much about it, is the complexity of configuring LPRng. Is it
> harder for a newbie to set it up than to set up lpr? Comments, please.
Maybe it's more comfortable, but the last time I had to use lprng, I
was unable to get printing and pcnfsd configured working (however on a
LST 2.2 distribution, but they don't have lpr at all). The problem was
printing from one DOS client, using the spool dir on the linux server
and forwarding the printjob to another DOS client with the printer.
Maybe not a common task, but it did only work with lpr.