Re: Bug#311344: Replacing lpr-ppd with lprng removes printer database

[debdev@tonelli.sns.it (A Mennucc)]

maybe this problem may be mentioned in the Sarge release notes ?

On Wed, Jun 01, 2005 at 04:46:14AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 01, 2005 at 01:15:37PM +0200, A Mennucc wrote:
....
> > any suggestions?
> 
> I don't see any reason to worry about it; I think it was a bug for lpr-ppd
> to ship /etc/printcap as a conffile, but it's a historical bug that I don't
> think we should be trying to fix now.  The simple answer is "well, don't
> purge packages without looking at the conffile list!".
> 
> It would definitely be wrong for lprng to declare /etc/printcap as a
> conffile; there are many packages that use /etc/printcap, with no common
> package they can depend on which could own this conffile, and /etc/printcap
> also doesn't fit policy's description of what a conffile should be.  (If
> you're installing a printer daemon, you almost certainly want to print,
> which means customizing the printcap...)
> 
> Thanks,
> -- 
> Steve Langasek
> postmodern programmer



-- 
Andrea Mennucc
 "Ukn ow,Ifina llyfixe dmysp acebar.ohwh atthef"