Armin K. schrieb: > Well, those are snapshots, and are always named after the current day, > ie for today, package name is foomatic-db-4.0-20120803.tar.gz. There are > also two files, foomatic-db-4.0-current.tar.gz and > foomatic-db-current.tar.gz, which are possibly symlinks to > date-versioned one. I guess we could use -current, but ... If some > change occours, we might not be prepared. That's why I asked to have > some snapshot on the servers and write and/or correct instructions for > that one only.
i'd vote for using the original -current. as these packages are just printer definitions, there is a very low probability to have any issues with an update. i'm used to update the db-packages quite often - whenever i want to print from my laptop at a customer who has a printer which is not available in my local copy. (as i have customers with printers not supportet since 2 years or more, i quite often update the db hoping to finally be able to use his printer. usually to no avail - i just have to create a pdf and print from the customers windows machine...). i never had any issues with updating (hopefully murphy is not reading!!). as far as i understand, the currently installed printers won't be affected by a db-update, as the definitions will be copied to the cups directories while installing the printer and no automatic update on cups will be done when updateing the db. i remember when i first installed a customers printer in cups, there was no way to activate the second paper feed (he has the plain paper in feed 2 and his ci-paper in feed 1). later i read somewhere the second feed is supported now in a updated foomatic db. updating the db didn't help - i had to remove the printer from cups an reinstall it in cups to get the options for the second feed. thus my thumb up for pointing to the -current and against a local copy. tobias -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
