Re: [foomatic-filters] Changing the debconf template
Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
>>> When used with generic PostScript printers (and under certain
>>> conditions with other printers) this causes an extra page to be
>>> printed after each job.
>>
>> i am not familiar with foomatic-filters. To me the explanation in brackets
>> is vague. What are these certain conditions? Do i have to be worried? No
>> clue.
>
> Well. Those conditions are really not supposed to arise these days. And so they
> are either i) known and worked-around (it is possible to configure the
> ps_accounting per driver or ii) sufficiently rare to have triggered zero bugs in
> 2.5 years of default changed in Ubuntu.
We're assuming Ubuntu supports non-CUPS printing systems and
"generic PostScript printers", and would therefore be able to detect
if lpr printing was broken...
On the other hand, if it's true that enabling the ps_accounting
option on Squeeze only ever has benefits and no down-side, why is
there a debconf question about it at all?
[...]
> Okay. How about documenting this in debian.NEWS and simply getting rid of that
> paragraph ?
What would the file say? "If print jobs have an extra page, disable
accounting and re-open bug #XXXXXX"? It seems to me that this
advice is equally likely to be useful on newly installed systems, so
the question of version numbers is irrelevant and the issue should
just be documented in README.Debian.
--
JBR with qualifications in linguistics, experience as a Debian
sysadmin, and probably no clue about this particular package
Reply to: