 Relationships |
|
| Anonymous | Login | 2024-04-19 08:29 CEST |
| Main | My View | View Issues |
| Viewing Issue Simple Details [ Jump to Notes ] | [ View Advanced ] [ Issue History ] [ Print ] | ||||||
| ID | Category | Severity | Reproducibility | Date Submitted | Last Update | ||
| 0004533 | [cupsclient] packaging | minor | always | 2010-08-27 19:24 | 2011-08-05 01:38 | ||
| Reporter | phil | View Status | public | ||||
| Assigned To | maciej | ||||||
| Priority | normal | Resolution | no change required | ||||
| Status | closed | ||||||
| Summary | 0004533: cups binaries conflict with system binary names | ||||||
| Description |
I have only just noticed that "cupsclient" provides binaries that have a namespace conflict with system level ones! :( specifically, lp, lpstat, lpq, lpr, lprm, cancel I dont recall this ever being brought up on the maintainers list, or discussed previously. "cups" has always been just a black hole to me. Until I decided to try using it just now :( Please give some thought to this problem. |
||||||
| Additional Information | |||||||
| Tags | No tags attached. | ||||||
| Attached Files | |||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
Relationships |
|
|
Notes |
|
|
(0008219) maciej (reporter) 2010-08-27 21:04 |
Part of cups deployment on Solaris is removing the SUNW printing packages. It's up to the user to remove the packages beforehand. The packages are: SUNWscplp SUNWppm SUNWpsu SUNWpsr SUNWpcu SUNWpcr After these packages are removed, lp, lpstat, lpq and the like are all gone from /usr/bin. There are still conflicting man pages; I removed these using a configuration management system. I don't know if there's any good way of handling that. Back to the /usr/bin vs /opt/csw/bin topic, I don't see any issue with the binary names. There's a blog post that I used as a guideline for deploying cups: http://blogs.sun.com/DanX/entry/using_cups_print_server_for [^] Perhaps we could have a better documentation and a better way of delivering the documentation. |
|
(0008220) phil (reporter) 2010-08-27 22:33 |
Overlooking the potential disagreement about naming principles for a minute... There's some inconsistency here. If your standpoint is "the sun packages need to be removed", then you should also complain, or do something, about the fact that if you install nothing but CSWcupsclient, there is a conflict with SUNWpcu and SUNWpcr Doing your check/removal for CSWcups only, is incomplete, from a user standpoint. It seems like a reasonable thing to me in some circumstances to install only CSWcupsclient without ever installing CSWcups For the documentation: I'm not suggesting that you write The Definitive Guide To CUPS setup. Only that you please at least provide a reference to one, in /opt/csw/share/doc/cupsclient :-) |
|
(0008221) skayser (administrator) 2010-08-28 12:44 |
For the sake of completeness, we already have instructions on how to replace Sun delivered Cups with ours. That's what we do internally and at customer sites. http://wiki.opencsw.org/cups-package [^] You could integrate it into a README.CSW and point to it via a postmessage to guide users. Or point to the Wiki page right away. IMHO a user-site configuration issue similar to other packages like e.g. our MTAs which deliver mailq and sendmail. Executable name clashes there too by the way. |
|
(0008222) phil (reporter) 2010-08-28 16:56 |
btw, the "name clashes" on postfix are okay, because they are in a different location, rather then /opt/csw/bin. That's why we have /opt/csw/gnu as well. |
|
(0009219) maciej (reporter) 2011-08-05 01:38 |
Currently, there is consensus that the name conflicts are not a problem. In the case of cups, the procedure is to remove Sun printing packages, so the identically named packages are gone from /usr/bin and /usr/sbin. http://lists.opencsw.org/pipermail/maintainers/2011-June/014803.html [^] http://wiki.opencsw.org/cups-package [^] |
| Copyright © 2000 - 2008 Mantis Group |  |
