[Printing-summit] [lsb-discuss] Printer/driver
george at etd.ussj.ricoh.com
Wed Aug 23 10:16:55 PDT 2006
> -----Original Message-----
> From: printing-summit-bounces at lists.freestandards.org
> summit-bounces at lists.freestandards.org] On Behalf Of Till Kamppeter
> Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2006 6:34 AM
> To: Klaus Singvogel
> Cc: Steve Schafer; lsb-discuss; Stark, Jens; Wichmann, Mats D;
> summit at lists.freestandards.org
> Subject: Re: [Printing-summit] [lsb-discuss] Printer/driver
> Klaus Singvogel wrote:
> > foomatic-rip is not mandatory for systems with PostScript printers
> > (and a few others). Vendors, which want to build up a small distro,
> > can only longer be LSB compliant, if they don't have foomatic-rip
> > because of missing necessity.
> > I don't think it's a mandatory requirement to have foomatic-rip in
> > every distribution, only a "might have" or "should have".
I guess technically, there's no need (besides marketing concerns) to LSB
certify "Pure" Postscript printer/drivers if they are provided by
manufacture. "Pure" Postscript printers are automatically certified by
> My thought was that LSB is standardizing what the distros are
> delivering. Every distro currently ships foomatic-rip. foomatic-rip is
> also useful for PostScript printers, as it allows to use PPDs also in
> non-CUPS environments. LSB does not only contain things which are
> by EVERY user, but many things which are used by MANY users.
I agree with Till that foomatic-rip should be included in LSB standard.
(Unless it is targeting distributions like RHEL3 or older)
Right now, Foomatic-rip has become a standard part of all major Linux
distributions and Solaris 10. All 700+ PPD files (including Postscript
PPDs) Ricoh releases to LP.org *REQUIRES* Foomatic-rip. Only with the
help of Foomatic-rip, secure print features like LockedPrint, UserCode
can be provided to end user.
Those PPD files and secure print features will even work on non-CUPS
system like Solaris 10, thanks for Foomatic-rip.
> In addition, requiring foomatic-rip avoids that every LSB-compliant
> driver package ships its own foomatic-rip.
> > Reminds me to vote for a enhancement on foomatic-rip:
> > "foomatic --version" or "foomatic-rip --help" should print out the
> > current version. Then it could be better
> > Till, main author of foomatic-rip, what do you think about adding
> I think this is a good idea.
> > Good idea.
> > But please only with an open set, where hardware vendors can add
> > special papers (like size Din A00), and special options. But the
> > common ones should be reduced to a fix set.
> Yes, requirement of standard option names should not forbid the
> for functions which are not covered by standard names. But having the
> most common standardized improves the possibility for automated
> a lot.
> Printing-summit mailing list
> Printing-summit at lists.freestandards.org
More information about the Printing-summit