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

Re: CUPS: Why do we disable page logging in page_log by default?



Hi Till,

Le mercredi, 8 juin 2016, 14.07:40 Till Kamppeter a écrit :
> to address the following bug reports
> 
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/1585380
> https://github.com/apple/cups/issues/4798
> 
> I have done some fixes in cups-filters (already on the BZR, will be in
> 1.9.0 to be released soon).
> 
> But these fixes only work if page logging is not generally disabled in
> CUPS, as it is currently with the CUPS which comes with Debian and
> Ubuntu.
> 
> The disabling is done by a line
> 
> PageLogFormat
> 
> without any assigned value in /etc/cups/cupsd.conf.
> 
> One can control this default setting at build time by the
> --enable-page-logging option for ./configure, which controls whether
> cupsd.conf will have this line or not.

Indeed. This comes from the following upstream commit 
c9dcc485c5e628bfa9ff2bbb878b29f3eda0b5d0 included in 2.0b1:
> - Changed the default AccessLogLevel and PageLogFormat to disable the
>   access_log and page_log files by default (<rdar://problem/16495000>)

We don't have access to the rdar:// bug reports, so we don't have much 
more information.

> So my question is whether there is a reason for disabling page logging
> in Debian and Ubuntu? If yes, which reason?

The reason is "follow upstream in its design decisions unless there's a 
good reason not to".

> If no, we should add --enable-page-logging to the ./configure command
> line in debian/rules of the CUPS package, to avoid bug reports like
> the above-mentioned ones.

Well, the bug reported to CUPS pointed that the bug was in the driver, 
which is now fixed. That we couldn't detect bugs in the page logging 
pipeline because it is disabled by default doesn't make a good argument 
to enable page logging by default, really; I'd stick with the default as 
it is.

-- 
Cheers,
    OdyX

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.


Reply to: