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

Re: Why CUPS?

On Friday 11 December 2009 19:42:23 Teemu Likonen wrote:
> On 2009-12-09 14:52 (-0500), Stefan Monnier wrote:
> >> This does not only apply to client applications, but also to
> >> computers configured as CUPS clients (debian's default): You only
> >> set-up and configure a printer on one server for a whole network.
> >> With a default debian installation, the clients on the network will
> >> discover the printer automatically and 'just work'. I have never used
> >> lprng so I don't know, if it has a similar feature.
> >
> > Actually, it's the other way around: with CUPS, every client has to be
> > configured for that particular printer. To make up for it, CUPS has
> > support to make this confuiguration automatic, but if your client
> > doesn't have the appropriate driver, you're screwed.
> Not with my CUPS and Lenny boxes. I have CUPS and a CUPS-published
> printer configured on my main desktop machine. Then I have a laptop with
> just "aptitude install cups" default settings. On my home network the
> printer is available and fully functional for my laptop without any
> configuration or drivers needed in the laptop. "aptitude install cups"
> is everything that is needed.
> > With LPRng, the configuration is only done once and for all on one
> > machine. That's the only one that needs to have the appropriate
> > driver.
> Just like my CUPS.
> I don't know about LPRng at all, maybe it's better than CUPS, but your
> comments on CUPS definitely don't match my experience.

Nor mine.

I have my printers set-up on all my computers, and do not normally run them 
from the network.  But once when I was in a hurry, and the printer set-up on 
one of my boxes was unusable because the drivers etc. had been messed up (I 
can't remember how) I was able to print over the network from one of the 
other computers, in spite of the messed up driver on the computer I was 
working on.


Reply to: