Date: Thu, 24 Jul 1997 13:42:49 +0930 (CST) From: Michael Smith <msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au> To: mrm@Mole.ORG (M.R.Murphy) Cc: imp@rover.village.org, msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au, current@FreeBSD.ORG, tom@uniserve.com Subject: Re: lpr/lpd changes Message-ID: <199707240412.NAA14130@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> In-Reply-To: <199707240408.VAA20696@meerkat.mole.org> from "M.R.Murphy" at "Jul 23, 97 09:08:07 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
M.R.Murphy stands accused of saying: > > > > No. The only behaviour that makes any sense is for lpd itself to exit > > with a diagnostic if no printers are defined; there is no point in > > trying to teach something else about a private configuration file. > > > > Is this a good idea given the current defined behavior of lpc (say > WRT start). Um. I'm tempted to suggest that 'lpr' should know how to start the daemon too, but in reality this is likely to upset someone that's used to killing the daemon to temporarily prevent printing. > I think it's not broke, and don't fix it :-) If somebody doesn't > want to start lpd, let 'em decide not to do so and change their > configuration files appropriately. That's fair enough too. -- ]] Mike Smith, Software Engineer msmith@gsoft.com.au [[ ]] Genesis Software genesis@gsoft.com.au [[ ]] High-speed data acquisition and (GSM mobile) 0411-222-496 [[ ]] realtime instrument control. (ph) +61-8-8267-3493 [[ ]] Unix hardware collector. "Where are your PEZ?" The Tick [[
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199707240412.NAA14130>