Re: [Pkg-hpijs-devel] Bug#649991: Please rename the hplip packages to the printer-driver- convention
On 01/05/2012 01:36 PM, Didier Raboud wrote:
On Thu, 05 Jan 2012 13:16:15 +0100, Till Kamppeter wrote:
I based my patch on the summary I did both there [0] and when filing the
bug [1], both which didn't get reactions.
[0] http://lists.debian.org/debian-printing/2011/11/msg00017.html
[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-printing/2011/11/msg00050.html
My main question is "does hplip serve as printer driver for CUPS?", as
the main reasoning behind the printer-driver-* naming scheme is to have
them all installed in a standard installation involving cups.
A binary package containing PPDs for PostScript printers is a printer
driver, the driver for the PostScript mode of these printers. Note that
a PostScript printer driver usually consists of only PPD files.
A printer driver package has to contain at least PPDs (the files itself,
the PPDs pyppd-compressed, or a PPD generator, either an executable in
/usr/lib/cups/driver/ or a .drv file in /usr/share/cups/drv/) and the
PPD updater for these PPDs (to update PPDs of existing queues, either in
postinst script or a file in /usr/share/cups/ppd-updaters/). In
addition, it must contain all filters specified in the cupsFilter lines
of the PPDs and their dependencies or depend on the packages containing
these filters.
My suggestion is to create a new binary package named
printer-driver-postscript-hp containing the pyppd-compressed PostScript
PPD files (move from hplip-data) plus the PPD updater (move from hplip)
to get consistency. The driver name for this new package is
Postscript-HP (to be consistent with PostScript driver entry names on
OpenPrinting) and not hplip any more, so the files should have
appropriate names.
printer-driver-postscript-hp should recommend the hplip package, as
hplip gives extra functionality (like toner level check) to the
PostScript printers but the printers work also without the hplip package
installed. There are no PostScript PPDs with valid cupsFilter lines
requiring filter executables from the hplip package.
(As a side note, I think we'll end up having two classes of
printer-driver-* packages: the ones installed trough recommends and the
ones only suggested by printer-driver-all, but that's yet to be discussed.)
So there should be a new binary package named
"printer-driver-hp-postscript", containing these PPDs (current file
/usr/lib/cups/driver/hplip, should then be
/usr/lib/cups/driver/hp-postscript) and the corresponding PPD updater.
Sounds sane,
Lets name the "new" driver Postscript-HP and the package
printer-driver-postscript-hp, to be consistent with OpenPrinting.
The "hpijs-ppds" package is not needed by CUPS as CUPS auto-generates
the PPDs based on the .drv file in the "hpijs" binary package.
"hpijs-ppds" is only needed for non-CUPS spoolers which cannot cope
with a .drv file. WDYT, should "hpijs-ppds" also be renamed to
"printer-driver-..."? Should it keep its name? Or should it get
dropped?
Certainly not printer-driver-*, and I don't see a value in dropping it,
hence let's keep it as is.
OK, the hpijs-ppds package is not part of the standard CUPS printing
environment, so we do not rename it.
P.S. Do you want me to provide a new patch or will you work on it (I
don't mind preparing it, just say.)?
OK, please provide a new patch. Thanks you very much.
Till
Reply to: