On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 04:10:06PM -0500, gwes wrote: > I'm not sure what measure of "better" you're trying to apply. > > lpr et al. don't have a GUI. One could be wrapped around them. >
I personally wouldn't want that. Others have said that cups provides nice information for printers in other applications. > They don't do dynamic autoconfiguration. > In an industrial environment autoconfiguration can be very bad. > (examples like directing confidential output somewhere unexpected) > I haven't looked at the code from LPRng, but it provides options to use a pool of printers for certain jobs to be sent to. > I worked for a company that ran as many IBM 1403 printers as > they could buy. Line printers are very simple to run. > They don't need elaborate output filters. > > The only function I can think of that lpr doesn't have is > the capability to request a forms change and wait until > it has been done. That could be an entirely separate subsystem > invoked by lpr. When you say forms change, are you talking about paper size/type changing or something else? > > A laptop floating in many places could use something > complex like autoconfigure. Again, that could be wrapped > around lpr et al. I've been in many places where many wifi printers were wide open and in several adjacent businesses. > > Geoff Steckel
