[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [debian-printing] Packaging of vendor PPD files.

On Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 22:35 +0100, Francesco Paolo Lovergine wrote:
> I meant discussing them on d-policy, which is the proper ML for those
> things. The policy proposal bug is a quite different thing and requires
> a previous initial agreement.

Oh. Well, if you say so.

I then propose the following way to handle PPDs (Postscript Printer
Descriptions) in Debian:

* PPD collection packages should be named ppd-<vendor>.

* PPDs in PPD collection packages should be put in

* A meta package, ppd-all, should depend on all PPD collection

* Packages which use PPDs should make use of the PPDs in
  /usr/share/postscript/ppd. For example, the cupsys package could
  simply include a symlink in /usr/share/cups/model/ to

These are just some initial suggestions, and comments are very

Francesco also suggested that PPD collection packages should provide a
virtual package. I'm not sure what the point of that is, so maybe he
can explain that instead.

I'm not sure if /usr/share/postscript/ppd is the right directory to
use, one could also imagine simply using /usr/share/ppd since
/usr/share/postscript doesn't seem to be used for anything else.


Reply to: