On Mon, 3 Mar 2003, Tim Potter wrote: > On Sun, Mar 02, 2003 at 06:54:37AM -0800, Richard Sharpe wrote: > > > On Sat, 1 Mar 2003, Vance Lankhaar wrote: > > > > > What about adding a value to the printing param? -> "printing = > > > disabled" > > > > This seems like a good way to do it. Does anyone have any objections if I > > do so? > > Why do we need it? Just call lp_default_server_announce() and check if > the SV_TYPE_PRINTQ_SERVER bit is set. If no print shares are exported > then don't call nt_printing_backend_init().
That seems like a good idea. Seems like you printer-type guys know your way around that code :-) > I don't think we need yet another parameter when the information is > already available. I agree. Regards ----- Richard Sharpe, rsharpe[at]ns.aus.com, rsharpe[at]samba.org, sharpe[at]ethereal.com, http://www.richardsharpe.com
