From owner-freebsd-arch Mon Jun 26 8:49:55 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from obie.softweyr.com (obie.softweyr.com [204.68.178.33]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22FEE37B8ED for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 08:49:52 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from wes@softweyr.com) Received: from softweyr.com (Foolstrustident!@homer.softweyr.com [204.68.178.39]) by obie.softweyr.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id JAA21565; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 09:49:42 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from wes@softweyr.com) Message-ID: <39577BFD.3C3ECB54@softweyr.com> Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 09:51:25 -0600 From: Wes Peters Organization: Softweyr LLC X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; U; FreeBSD 4.0-STABLE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Sheldon Hearn Cc: arch@FreeBSD.ORG, papowell@astart.com Subject: Re: was: Bringing LPRng into FreeBSD? References: <43200.962012783@axl.ops.uunet.co.za> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Sheldon Hearn wrote: > > Could someone just enumerate the advantages of importing LPRng? It > seems to be a package which can me made to do everything FreeBSD's lpr > can do, but it does not seem to be a superset of FreeBSD's lpr. This > means that there is a cost associated with bringing it in as a > replacement. > > Are we sure that the cost is justified? Is it so much better than the > existing lpr that having it available as a port is "not enough"? > > I have no stsrong opinion one way or the other, but I do get the feeling > that this thread has skipped an important issue, instead focusing on > licensing. This looks like a little cart before horse. I think the primary reason given is that LPRng is under active maintenance, and the existing BSD lpr is not. -- "Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?" Wes Peters Softweyr LLC wes@softweyr.com http://softweyr.com/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message