Hi, Michael. On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 07:03:19PM +0200, Michael Schreckenbauer wrote: > Am Dienstag, 6. September 2011, 16:43:39 schrieb Alan Mackenzie: > > Is that right? How about it being saner to conform to standardised > > interfaces, protocols and formats?
> How about IPP? > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Printing_Protocol > Oh wait... that's what cups is using. Ah yes, a standard. So we have the choice between all the IPP implementations. That's cups and, ... err - is there another one? But why should I have to use an over the top bloated "Internet" protocol? I've got one single printer on the end of a USB cable. I want a simple spooler, as simple as possible and not simpler. > > No, the sane alternative is to use the `lpr' command, possibly augmented > > by special arguments for particular spoolers, but always having a > > fallback to standard `lpr'. That way, everybody's happy. Even me. ;-) > How about the lpr command provided by cups? > Does it not work for you? I believe it did work for me for the short time I had cups installed. More pertinent is, why won't the lpr command work for LibreOffice? > Michael -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).
