Norm Jacobs wrote:
> Ghee Teo wrote:
>> Norm Jacobs wrote:
>>  
>>>>            
>>>>> 3.  Should we use the CUPS or the LP  print service
>>>>> on Solaris?
>>>>> (sounds like CUPS is going to be the preferred
>>>>>  print service).
>>>>>                   
>>>> We have heard, although not investigated, that CUPS on Solaris 
>>>> fixes the printing Issues that we are having ... I am sure that it 
>>>> would handle more file type conversion (especially with 
>>>> GhostScript) than you could do manually with standard LP
>>>>             
>>> As I am no longer with Sun, I can't say definitively, but the 
>>> intention has been to move Solaris Nevada and OpenSolaris to CUPS.     
>>   It is a BIG miss for Norm not to be working inside Sun. while I 
>> can't say whether
>> the intention changes or not from Sun's business perspective. It is 
>> nevertheless we
>> recognize that CUPS is crucial/significant in the Open Source world, 
>> going against
>> it is to create more works for ourselves in the longer term.
>>  
>>>  I integrated CUPS in build 87, along with the bits necessary to 
>>> switch between CUPS and LP.  LP is the default right now.  CUPS was 
>>> to be the default in the future, after a few things were addressed.
>>>       
>>   There are a couple of piece of the CUPS for OpenSolaris was 
>> supposed to come
>> in very soon, namely, a Print Manager for CUPS and auto-detection for 
>> USB printers
>> through HAL integrated with CUPS. The former is coming in 107, but 
>> the latter is
>> now straw with Norm is able working on it. May be I can take over 
>> some other internal
>> processes like ARC, OSR, what do you think Norm?
> I filed an OSR a couple of months ago for the hal-cups-utils bits.  
  The OSR has been approved as I just checked.
> I also wrote a one pager for a SelfReview ARC case (there really 
> aren't any public interfaces, so it's not strictly necessary), but I 
> don't know what happened to that.
   I can take over the ARC works here if you still have a copy, 
otherwise, I guess I can work on one.
   Though I would appreciate the code changes you made that makes it 
works though :)

   Thanks,

-Ghee



Reply via email to