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

cups-filters 1.28.1 released!



Hi,

I have released cups-filters 1.28.1 now, with the following changes:

	- COPYING: Fixed several typos
	- libcupsfilters: Fixed typo in log message of
	  get_printer_attributes functions.
	- cups-browsed: Fixed typos in configuration file and man page
	- libcupsfilters: Let the PPD generator not suffix page size
	  names with ".Borderless" if all page sizes would get this
	  suffix, for example for printers which generally print
	  borderless.
	- libcupsfilters: Added "faxPrefix" option for generated IPP
	  Fax Out PPDs, so that this option also appears in print
	  dialogs.
	- driverless: List addresses for local services correctly when
	  using "--std-ipp-uris" (with "localhost" hostname).
	- driverless: Make calls of the ippfind utility somewhat faster,
	  setting the timeout of ippfind to automatic.
	- libcupsfilters: Resolve DNS-SD-based URIs for local services
	  correctly (using hostname "localhost").
	- libcupsfilters: In get_printer_attributes() functions do not
	  try to convert URIs which are not DNS-SD-based (Issue #294).
	- libcupsfilters: In get_printer_attributes() functions also
	  support URIs with "dnssd://..." scheme.
	- libcupsfilters: Moved signal handling back into main
	  function of the get_printer_attributes() variants, it got
	  moved out accidentally.
	- driverless: For generating a PPD, independent whether via
	  "driverless URI" or "driverless cat URI", always allow CUPS
	  driver URIs (prefixed with "driverless: " or
	  "driverless-fax:") and pure IPP URIs.
	- driverless: Accept clean IPP URIs also for 'driverless cat
	  ...' (Issue #295, Pull request #296).
	- driverless-fax: Do not use fixed path for call of driverless
	  itself (Pull request #293).

Bug fix release to fix several bugs in the new IPP Fax Out support by the "driverless" utility and also to fix some minor issues

Please release this on Debian so that it can sync into Ubuntu.

Thanks in advance.

   Till


Reply to: