Re: Should LPR be the standard printer daemon?
David Frey writes ("Re: Should LPR be the standard printer daemon?"):
>On Thu, Nov 19, 1998 at 07:09:18PM -0800, Adam J. Klein wrote:
>...
>>the complexity of configuring LPRng. Is it
>>harder for a newbie to set it up than to set up lpr? Comments, please.
>
>I don't know whether it's just me, but I wasn't able to make LPRng
>work.
Same here, although my printer setup is rather complicated. All ~60
printers here are either printed to by using netatalk's ifpap filter,
or on ethernet with jetdirect cards using some locally written
software (hpdriver, it's commercial). I am required by my department
to track print usage accurately[1], so my print filters have to be
able to query the printer to get info back.
Never could get netatalk working with lprng, and had to re-write
hpdriver to get it to work with lprng. Also have a small number of
remote SunOS lpr print queues, which lprng refuse to talk to (a
subject that we hashed out for months on the lprng mailing list to no
avail). The stock debian lpr works fine, except for one annoying and
one really painful problem:
1. (Minor) Although the man page claims that hosts.lpd supports NIS
netgroups, it doesn't, so every time I add a machine on the network I
have to twiddle this file.
2. (Major) Any time the standard lpr is running an input filter, it
stops answering print requestes. If it is churning on a 32 meg print
file (common here), that can take lpr/lprm/lpq down for minutes. Ouch.
So, neither works well, but lpr at least lets me print pages... :)
[1] For anyone that says it is simple, trust me, it isn't.
--
Richard W Kaszeta Graduate Student/Sysadmin
bofh@me.umn.edu University of MN, ME Dept
http://www.menet.umn.edu/~kaszeta
Reply to: