Re: postscript-enabled mozilla package anyone?
On Wednesday 07 July 2004 12:36 am, Michael B Allen wrote:
> Right the choices are A) not print, B) downgrade or C) install
> xprt-xprintorg. Personally I think people should try C before bitching too
> much.
Actually I and quite a few people tried C), and it didn't
work properly when it even worked at all. In quite a few cases
(like mine) it won't even start at all.
What it boils down to is; a packager ignoring /both/ upstream
/AND/ the users and forcing a replacement that simply isn't
ready for real use. All this for no real reason that I can see except to
masturbate his ego. It's worth noting that the upstream still uses
direct printing *BY* *DEFAULT* for both Firefox and Mozilla; so I can
hardly see that support has been dropped as he claims.
Oddly enough the only one to notice/complain about the alleged
security risk (I worry more about meteor strikes) is the guy who
changed it with no notice. The same one who closes any wishlist items
asking for it back with won't-fix. If this is such a gaping hole where are
the backports to Stable/Testing and why nothing on Debian Security?
I actually have a postscript printer, and would like to continue to use it.
However, I guess I need to throw my laserjet out now that uber-devel got a
bug up his butt. (How it got past his head is beyond me.)
Also could I mention how asinine it is to /have to/ run a separate printer
daemon just for one frelling browser; when we already *HAVE* cups/lpr.
In short, I don't care if Xprint *does* cure cancer, brings you free beer
and dancing girls, while giving everyone within fifty miles a joygasm.
It's still a damned stupid idea.
I am sticking with 1.6 / installing from upstream using equivs until this
bit of lunacy blows over.
--
Cow-orker > "But can you see where I'm coming from?"
Yes, but I'm hoping by the time you start approaching our atmosphere
there'll be enough warning and enough missiles to ensure you never set
foot on my planet. -- Enter the Cow-orker (23/8/2001)
Reply to: