* On 2015 13 Jun 08:08 -0500, LM wrote:
> Laurent Bercot wrote:
> >As for printing servers, I don't know, but I'd be surprised
> >if cupsd was the only possibility.
> >
> > And if it actually is the only possibility, then we have a bigger
> > problem than just sd_notify: it means that monopolies exist in free
> > software - real, existing monopolies, albeit more inconspicuous than
> > systemd's obvious attempts at a monopoly - and it is taking away from
> > users' freedom. And that is what needs to be fought first and foremost.
>
> Unfortunately, it seems like this is becoming the case. Was looking
> for less complex substitutes to cups that I could easily modify myself
> if I needed to. Didn't find a lot in that area. When I search for
> multimedia viewers that don't use ffmpeg, they're also difficult to
> find. There are several areas where I've looked for alternatives to a
> library or ways around using them and found few or no other options.

As if on cue, IgnorantGuru posts up a very timely and salient post:

https://igurublog.wordpress.com/2015/06/13/openwashing-and-other-deceptions-in-linux/

Sadly, CUPS is long one of these technologies ensnared by Apple and now
we're beholden to them. At first CUPS was a very good idea and an
independent project which was then somehow "bought" by Apple and for a
time things improved. Then a couple of years ago Linux support was more
or less dropped by Apple and CUPS, which worked flawlessly, almost
completely stopped working with my Brother HL-5240 save for
Open|LibreOffice. Last night Firefox actually printed to that printer
again so perhaps something has turned toward the better.

CUPS seems next to impossible to understand, much less troubleshoot.

> There's a list of printer/spooler options at:
> http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/Printing-HOWTO/spoolers.html
> Main alternatives typically mentioned are from BSD (lpd and lprng).
> Someone mentioned pdq as a simpler alternative to cups. I was even
> going so far as to looking into doing a copy command to send
> postscript files to a printer. That got me looking into ghostscript
> and ghostpcl. That's another area where there seems to be a monopoly.
> There are practically no alternatives to ghostscript (that perform
> adequately when converting files to postscript) and I could not find a
> decent alternative to ghostpcl to create PCL formatted information.
> Ghostpcl is designed so that it uses its own versions of third party
> libraries (which can be annoying) rather than system libraries. One
> would need to create one's own build scripts or get an alternative to
> work around this. I should mention, my search for alternatives was
> limited to compiled languages such as C or C++ (for
> speed/responsiveness reasons) and I did not choose to consider many of
> the possibilities written in interpreted languages at the time.

It's the layers upon layers of libraries and the morass of filters and
drivers that makes printing a near incomprehensible mess. I am naive
enough to think that if a printer supports PS or PCL that it should be
trivial to print to it. The reality seems to be another matter
completely.

> > I firmly believe that in 20ish years, we have lost most of the awareness
> > of what free software is and what it means. If we cannot actually dive
> > into the code and take out what we don't want, then it's de facto not
> > free software anymore, no matter the reason.
>
> That is one of the goals I have. I want to be able to go into the
> code on my system and be able to make changes when needed. Most
> people I discuss the subject with who run Linux have no interest in
> how the code underneath works and don't understand why someone might
> find it important to do this. Where I work, they're terrified of
> changing source code and don't want anyone but a qualified distributor
> doing that. It's very difficult to find the building blocks to a
> system that are well designed, easy to modify and can be maintained by
> one individual if needed. I really think you've hit on something
> important with your statement.

I find myself looking in that direction as well, so you're not alone.
In fact, I get the sense that most posting to this list have similar
goals.

> It would be great if Devuan became the Linux distribution that offered
> its users alternatives to more commonly used, often bloated software.
> It would certainly make a great base distribution for other
> derivatives if it did. Most Linux distributions I've run across so
> far try to limit ones choices and make you follow their philosophy and
> way of doing things. Personally, the systems that work the best for
> me are the ones that don't try to lock you into doing things a
> specific way and let you do what you want.

This, exactly this. Thank you, Laura, you have penned in your last
sentence exactly what my philosophy has been ever since Windows 95 was
dumped on the scene and I went to Slackware to maintain the freedom I
had known with MS-DOS. I think I have gotten lax in the intervening
years (something about aging and wanting to divert my energies into
other areas) and accepted these new monoliths/monocultures for the ease
they provided. Over the past year I have had a rude awakening and am
generally striving toward minimalism these days.

I would dearly love to dump CUPS in favor of something comprehensible
that would feed my HL-5240 compatible PS or PCL.

- Nate

--

"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all
possible worlds. The pessimist fears this is true."

Ham radio, Linux, bikes, and more: http://www.n0nb.us