From owner-freebsd-arch Fri Jun 30 5:38:53 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from gw.nectar.com (gw.nectar.com [209.98.143.44]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2185237C4DC for ; Fri, 30 Jun 2000 05:38:50 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from nectar@nectar.com) Received: from bone.nectar.com (bone.nectar.com [10.0.1.105]) by gw.nectar.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47C219B31; Fri, 30 Jun 2000 07:38:49 -0500 (CDT) Received: by bone.nectar.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 5E7341DCB; Fri, 30 Jun 2000 07:38:48 -0500 (CDT) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 07:38:48 -0500 From: "Jacques A. Vidrine" To: Garance A Drosihn Cc: Chuck Robey , Will Andrews , papowell@astart.com, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: was: Bringing LPRng into FreeBSD? Message-ID: <20000630073848.C65332@bone.nectar.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: ; from drosih@rpi.edu on Fri, Jun 30, 2000 at 12:23:27AM -0400 X-Url: http://www.nectar.com/ Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Fri, Jun 30, 2000 at 12:23:27AM -0400, Garance A Drosihn wrote: > [this says nothing about how much stuff lprng or apsfilter > brings in, of course. I'm just not sure why one would fire > up ghostscript to print gif images...] For the record, LPRng per se has only a very simple filter for handling CR <-> CR/LF issues. Fancy filters are supplied by IFHP, including e.g. PostScript -> PCL conversion using GhostScript. While I'm wasting bandwidth, I'll just say that if LPRng were available under the BSD license, I would be in favor of importing it. It is much nicer from an administrative point of view, even without any fancy filters. If it were imported, IFHP could also be imported or it could remain a port. I tend to think that the latter would be better. -- Jacques Vidrine / n@nectar.com / nectar@FreeBSD.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message