From gad@santropez.acs.rpi.edu Mon Nov 26 20:28:55 2001 Return-Path: Received: from santropez.acs.rpi.edu (santropez.acs.rpi.edu [128.113.24.162]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FE8737B417; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 20:28:54 -0800 (PST) Received: (from gad@localhost) by santropez.acs.rpi.edu (8.11.6/8.11.4) id fAR4SqO17032; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 23:28:52 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from gad) Message-Id: <200111270428.fAR4SqO17032@santropez.acs.rpi.edu> Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 23:28:52 -0500 (EST) From: Garance A Drosehn Reply-To: Garance A Drosehn To: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org Cc: kde@freebsd.org Subject: x11/kdelibs2 installs print/cups, which then causes problems X-Send-Pr-Version: 3.113 X-GNATS-Notify: >Number: 32321 >Category: ports >Synopsis: x11/kdelibs2 installs print/cups, which then causes problems >Confidential: no >Severity: non-critical >Priority: medium >Responsible: freebsd-ports >State: closed >Quarter: >Keywords: >Date-Required: >Class: sw-bug >Submitter-Id: current-users >Arrival-Date: Mon Nov 26 20:30:00 PST 2001 >Closed-Date: Mon Dec 3 17:16:09 PST 2001 >Last-Modified: Mon Dec 03 17:16:33 PST 2001 >Originator: Garance A Drosehn >Release: FreeBSD 4.4-STABLE i386 >Organization: RPI; Troy NY >Environment: System: FreeBSD santropez.acs.rpi.edu 4.4-STABLE FreeBSD 4.4-STABLE #0: Tue Nov 20 21:59:46 EST 2001 root@santropez.acs.rpi.edu:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/Dual-650P3 i386 >Description: The makefile for x11/kdelibs2 has a dependency on cups.2:${PORTSDIR}/print/cups This (apparently) causes CUPS to be installed when the user goes to install KDE. If the user is not actually using CUPS, this causes some confusion between /usr/local/bin/lpr (the cups version) and /usr/bin/lpr (the version everyone on the machine should really be using). What may then happen is that the administrator of the machine starts pulling their hair out becomes some users on the machine can print, and other ones can not (the difference being whether the user has /usr/local/bin in their PATH). Questions ensue, which generally come my way (gad@FreeBSD.org), and eventually we realize what the problem is. >How-To-Repeat: Install the port, I guess. >Fix: I am not sure what the best fix is. I have not looked at the port, but I am writing this right now because today I got two different administrators who ran into this problem, and of course came to me because "lpr isn't working". In some sense it's better for me when they come in groups like this, because I'm more likely to remember to ask them about /usr/local/bin/lpr vs /usr/bin/lpr. On the other hand, it would probably be better if we could just fix this. I assume that KDE needs some library that CUPS creates. Could we break that library out into a separate port, so the library could be installed without disrupting print-commands? Is there some change I could make to freebsd's lpr/lpd which would make it easier to fix this KDE port? I am willing to do that (particularly if it means less email from frustrated administrators), but I am not sure if that is the best fix either. (I do not know if that would help people who use lprNG instead of the bsd lpr, for instance). >Release-Note: >Audit-Trail: Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-ports->kde Responsible-Changed-By: ijliao Responsible-Changed-When: Mon Nov 26 21:51:50 PST 2001 Responsible-Changed-Why: over to maintainer http://www.FreeBSD.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=32321 Responsible-Changed-From-To: kde->ports Responsible-Changed-By: will Responsible-Changed-When: Tue Nov 27 05:09:10 PST 2001 Responsible-Changed-Why: Not a KDE problem. http://www.FreeBSD.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=32321 From: Will Andrews To: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org Cc: Subject: FW: Re: ports/32321: x11/kdelibs2 installs print/cups, which then causes problems Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 08:09:02 -0500 Forgot to send this to the audit trail. ----- Forwarded message from Will Andrews ----- Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 08:04:49 -0500 Reply-To: Will Andrews From: Will Andrews To: kde-freebsd@lists.csociety.org, kde@FreeBSD.org Cc: Garance A Drosihn , desmo@bandwidth.org, jah4007@cs.rit.edu Subject: Re: ports/32321: x11/kdelibs2 installs print/cups, which then causes problems User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.22.1i On Mon, Nov 26, 2001 at 11:59:43PM -0500, Alan Eldridge wrote: > Another PR just got opened because kdelibs 2.2.1 installs cups. Now, I use > cups, but if I didn't, this would upset me just a tiny bit, especially if I > used, e.g., LPRng[1]. I don't understand the problem with KDE. > We can safely remove the depend in the Makefile; if cups is there, it'll get > used for the build, and if it it's not there, it won't. No problem. Actually, it IS a problem. If CUPS is used and the package db doesn't know it, something will break if someone later decides to remove it. That is not acceptable. CUPS is installed because many people find it easier to configure their printers in kcontrol using CUPS than BSD LPR or LPRng. If there's a conflict between CUPS and some other LPR thing, it's not KDE's problem. > I don't know the nuances well enough to know whether we can control the > generation of a dependencies in a binary package. If we can, I think we can > get away with just stifling the depend on cups in the output package. > If we can't, then what can we do to prevent hosing the user? Nothing. In my investigation, it's not KDE's problem. > [1] LPRng and CUPS both provide /usr/local/bin/lp* and so installing one on > top of the other is just not nice at all. If pkg_add had a concept of > conflicting packages, then.... It's not KDE's problem. :-) The CUPS and LPRng (and whatever else) should DTRT and not install binaries with wordy names like "lpr". Since it's not a KDE problem, I've CC:'d the maintainers of the CUPS and LPRng ports to bring the problem to their attention. I'll move the PR to them too. On Mon, Nov 26, 2001 at 23:27:16 -0500, Garance A Drosehn wrote: >>Synopsis: x11/kdelibs2 installs print/cups, which then causes problems >>Description: > The makefile for x11/kdelibs2 has a dependency on > cups.2:${PORTSDIR}/print/cups > This (apparently) causes CUPS to be installed when the user goes > to install KDE. Well, of course. It's a dependency. > If the user is not actually using CUPS, this causes some confusion > between /usr/local/bin/lpr (the cups version) and /usr/bin/lpr (the > version everyone on the machine should really be using). What may > then happen is that the administrator of the machine starts pulling > their hair out becomes some users on the machine can print, and > other ones can not (the difference being whether the user has > /usr/local/bin in their PATH). Questions ensue, which generally > come my way (gad@FreeBSD.org), and eventually we realize what the > problem is. Well, you've hit right on the actual problem: CUPS and LPRng are installing the same binary! :( >>Fix: > > I assume that KDE needs some library that CUPS creates. Could we > break that library out into a separate port, so the library could > be installed without disrupting print-commands? Is there some > change I could make to freebsd's lpr/lpd which would make it easier > to fix this KDE port? I am willing to do that (particularly if it > means less email from frustrated administrators), but I am not sure > if that is the best fix either. (I do not know if that would help > people who use lprNG instead of the bsd lpr, for instance). There's nothing wrong with KDE -- the whole reason I added the CUPS dependency is because KDE has a modular print configuration system which allows a user to pick from a variety of different systems to use to print. One particular system you can tell it to use is CUPS. KDE has support for using CUPS, and I figured, since many people use it, why not? It's not necessary, of course, for KDE to print at all. But since this is not a KDE problem, I'm not "fixing" it. You should direct your effort at the maintainers of CUPS/LPRng ports. By the way, desmo@bandwidth.org, I'm not sure why your port is in the sysutils category. It really should be in print... but I guess that's a debatable matter. -- wca ----- End forwarded message ----- -- wca From: Will Andrews To: David Leimbach Cc: Will Andrews , kde-freebsd@lists.csociety.org, kde@FreeBSD.org, Garance A Drosihn , desmo@bandwidth.org, jah4007@cs.rit.edu, FreeBSD-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports/32321: x11/kdelibs2 installs print/cups, which then causes problems Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 08:38:51 -0500 On Tue, Nov 27, 2001 at 07:25:53AM -0600, David Leimbach wrote: > Obviously CUPS isn't necessary for a functional KDE system. Will said > so himself... its one of many options. Why then must it be installed by > default? It's not a strong "must", just I deemed it would be popular enough that I'd include support for it by default (such support has to be done at compile time, unfortunately). > Will has always been cool about my requests to have qt-designer built > but IMHO it belongs as a dependency to the rest of KDE. If you are > going to write KDE programs with Kdevelop [which is a part of KDE now] > you really can benefit a whole hell of a lot by using QT-designer with > it, especially since Kdevelop can invoke it and has no other provisions > for running a different GUI design tool. QT Designer doesn't belong as part of KDE. It belongs as part of QT's development environment. I removed it because I think people who are developers are smart enough to know they can add QT Designer separately. I think that users who'll never use or even know about QT Designer should be spared the pain of having to {compile,download} the QT Designer bits. > CUPS is different. Its one of many choices. I don't see how the fact > that CUPS conflicts with some other print system is the CUPS > maintainer's problem either. I mean he/she can really just say that > only an idiot would install two print systems on the same machine and > that the KDE port should recognize that fact and not install one by > default. It *IS* the CUPS maintainer's problem *and* every other port maintainer in the tree who maintains a port with a similar "bin/lpr" entry in their pkg-plist. Your package is supposed to Do The Right Thing. People like the folks Garance gets complaints from are the last people FreeBSD ports wants to frustrate. Simply because KDE installs CUPS should not be considered a side case because it's quite possible other ports would want to install CUPS. So there are several solutions: 1) Ports should fundamentally support more use of "wrapper" packages which serve only to be acted on as a dependency by those that need some kind of system (e.g. CUPS vs. LPRng, or Postfix vs. QMail). 2) Ports should fundamentally support the use of "recommended" dependencies and not "hard" dependencies.. in packages too. 3) The CUPS and LPRng maintainers should work out a way to keep their packages from conflicting should some user decide to install both of them. 4) KDE could remove CUPS from kdelibs dependencies. From my point of view, the best (perhaps not the easiest or quickest) solution is #3, simply because it accounts for other cases where someone might get confused because of the conflict. > I mean who's port should take care of the only one print system rule? > All? All but one? Good question. See option #1 above. > Why not just pull the KDE-CUPS dependency out and make separate ports > for KDE-CUPS and the other options as a post install update? Is this > possible? If it's possible, I would be willing to do it. But you'll have to figure out how to do it. :) -- wca From: Will Andrews To: David Leimbach Cc: kde-freebsd@lists.csociety.org, kde@FreeBSD.org, Garance A Drosihn , desmo@bandwidth.org, jah4007@cs.rit.edu, FreeBSD-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports/32321: x11/kdelibs2 installs print/cups, which then causes problems Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 08:40:28 -0500 OK, people, reply to this one, which has Garance's address fixed. ----- Forwarded message from Will Andrews ----- Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 08:38:51 -0500 Reply-To: Will Andrews From: Will Andrews To: David Leimbach Cc: Will Andrews , kde-freebsd@lists.csociety.org, kde@FreeBSD.org, Garance A Drosihn , desmo@bandwidth.org, jah4007@cs.rit.edu, FreeBSD-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports/32321: x11/kdelibs2 installs print/cups, which then causes problems User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.22.1i On Tue, Nov 27, 2001 at 07:25:53AM -0600, David Leimbach wrote: > Obviously CUPS isn't necessary for a functional KDE system. Will said > so himself... its one of many options. Why then must it be installed by > default? It's not a strong "must", just I deemed it would be popular enough that I'd include support for it by default (such support has to be done at compile time, unfortunately). > Will has always been cool about my requests to have qt-designer built > but IMHO it belongs as a dependency to the rest of KDE. If you are > going to write KDE programs with Kdevelop [which is a part of KDE now] > you really can benefit a whole hell of a lot by using QT-designer with > it, especially since Kdevelop can invoke it and has no other provisions > for running a different GUI design tool. QT Designer doesn't belong as part of KDE. It belongs as part of QT's development environment. I removed it because I think people who are developers are smart enough to know they can add QT Designer separately. I think that users who'll never use or even know about QT Designer should be spared the pain of having to {compile,download} the QT Designer bits. > CUPS is different. Its one of many choices. I don't see how the fact > that CUPS conflicts with some other print system is the CUPS > maintainer's problem either. I mean he/she can really just say that > only an idiot would install two print systems on the same machine and > that the KDE port should recognize that fact and not install one by > default. It *IS* the CUPS maintainer's problem *and* every other port maintainer in the tree who maintains a port with a similar "bin/lpr" entry in their pkg-plist. Your package is supposed to Do The Right Thing. People like the folks Garance gets complaints from are the last people FreeBSD ports wants to frustrate. Simply because KDE installs CUPS should not be considered a side case because it's quite possible other ports would want to install CUPS. So there are several solutions: 1) Ports should fundamentally support more use of "wrapper" packages which serve only to be acted on as a dependency by those that need some kind of system (e.g. CUPS vs. LPRng, or Postfix vs. QMail). 2) Ports should fundamentally support the use of "recommended" dependencies and not "hard" dependencies.. in packages too. 3) The CUPS and LPRng maintainers should work out a way to keep their packages from conflicting should some user decide to install both of them. 4) KDE could remove CUPS from kdelibs dependencies. >From my point of view, the best (perhaps not the easiest or quickest) solution is #3, simply because it accounts for other cases where someone might get confused because of the conflict. > I mean who's port should take care of the only one print system rule? > All? All but one? Good question. See option #1 above. > Why not just pull the KDE-CUPS dependency out and make separate ports > for KDE-CUPS and the other options as a post install update? Is this > possible? If it's possible, I would be willing to do it. But you'll have to figure out how to do it. :) -- wca ----- End forwarded message ----- -- wca From: Will Andrews To: David Leimbach Cc: Will Andrews , kde-freebsd@lists.csociety.org, kde@FreeBSD.org, Garance A Drosihn , desmo@bandwidth.org, jah4007@cs.rit.edu, FreeBSD-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports/32321: x11/kdelibs2 installs print/cups, which then causes problems Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 09:01:03 -0500 On Tue, Nov 27, 2001 at 07:49:27AM -0600, David Leimbach wrote: > That's a good enough rationale for me... Just so long as the QT-designer > port doesn't fall behind... :) Of course not. The qt-designer port is a slave port of the Qt port. So basically, what I need to do is figure out how to make it depend even more on the Qt port so that if I update the Qt port, it won't break the qt-designer port. Or in other words, I need to make it so that there's just a simple compile switch that has to be called to pick the "qt side of sub-tools" and the "qt-designer side of sub-tools". It shouldn't be hard to do... wanna give it a shot? :) > You said it was a compile time thingy... not a post KDE install > whatchamacallit... > I don't care to invest the time in it... either. Not with the 100000 > other things I have on my open source plate at the moment. That's true. :) It's a tradeoff though.. I'm trying to accomodate users here, not developers... that's KDE's goal. -- wca From: Lauri Watts To: Will Andrews Cc: kde-freebsd@lists.csociety.org, kde@FreeBSD.org, Garance A Drosihn , desmo@bandwidth.org, jah4007@cs.rit.edu, FreeBSD-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: [kde-freebsd] Re: ports/32321: x11/kdelibs2 installs print/cups, which then causes problems Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 16:53:37 +0100 On Tuesday 27 November 2001 14.38, you wrote: > On Tue, Nov 27, 2001 at 07:25:53AM -0600, David Leimbach wrote: > > Will has always been cool about my requests to have qt-designer built > > but IMHO it belongs as a dependency to the rest of KDE. If you are KDevelop is not certainly part of the KDE project, but it's on a different release schedule, and is normally handled quite separately. Qt Designer could ever be considered a dependency of *using* KDE. > 2) Ports should fundamentally support the use of "recommended" > dependencies and not "hard" dependencies.. in packages too. This would be fabulous. Then we wouldn't have to turn around and repeat this conversation over TeTex and SDL :) > 4) KDE could remove CUPS from kdelibs dependencies. > > From my point of view, the best (perhaps not the easiest or > quickest) solution is #3, simply because it accounts for other > cases where someone might get confused because of the conflict. Best longterm. For the shortterm, option 4 may fulfill "quick and easy" if not necessarily best. For what it's worth, kdeprint does support lots of other print subsystems, including lpr, LPRng and others. There's also a configure switch to disable KDE's use of cups, even when it's present on the system ( --disable-cups if that wasn't obvious.) I've built and installed KDE many times without CUPS being installed, it's never failed. The kdeprint module still builds, without CUPS handling, and it still works (I can print with the print button in KDE to whatever printer I have set up locally, and I can print via kdeprint from Netscape straight out to lpr too - just tell Netscape that it's print command is "kdeprint" instead of lpr.) It really is very strongly recommended - KDE's printing is very much more powerful with CUPS than without, and you can entirely configure CUPS from within KDE's control panel, which you cannot (yet) do for lpr and friends. "Strongly recommended" still doesn't equal "won't work without it" though. > > Why not just pull the KDE-CUPS dependency out and make separate ports > > for KDE-CUPS and the other options as a post install update? Is this > > possible? > > If it's possible, I would be willing to do it. But you'll have > to figure out how to do it. :) How I'd do it: Make one port of kdelibs with cups as a dependency, and one without. Enforce it with --disable-cups in the configure args for the no-cups version, just to make sure people are getting exactly what they asked for. I'd like to suggest the default kdelibs = kde-with-cups, and make the no-cups version the different one. Naming them this way should then make it obvious what's going on for admins too. Regards, -- Lauri Watts From: Will Andrews To: Joey Garcia Cc: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org, kde-freebsd@lists.csociety.org Subject: Re: FW: Re: ports/32321: x11/kdelibs2 installs print/cups, which then causes problems Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 14:58:39 -0500 On Tue, Nov 27, 2001 at 11:56:52AM -0800, Joey Garcia wrote: > Okay, so then KDE doesn't really *need* CUPS then, right? Would it be too > much of a a hassle to make any *non-required* dependencies into a option. > > For instance, CUPS is added as a dependency if you do a "make > WITH_CUPS=YES" or something like that? That would just be a quick > Makefile hack, wouldn't it? > > I would imagine that KDE installation would be easier if all non-required > dependencies could be optionalized throughout the whole KDE2 ports. Yeah > - that would make the Makefiles more complicated, but it can cut down on > unwanted dependencies. As I said in other emails (don't know if they were sent to FreeBSD-gnats-submit and thus ports), this only covers ports, not packages, which I suspect many people use in light of the fact that it takes a powerful machine to compile most of KDE in under 6 hours. -- wca From: Garance A Drosehn To: Lauri Watts Cc: kde-freebsd@lists.csociety.org, kde@FreeBSD.org, desmo@bandwidth.org, jah4007@cs.rit.edu, FreeBSD-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports/32321: x11/kdelibs2 installs print/cups, which then causes problems Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 18:44:54 -0500 [again, I am answering this by reading the PR from freebsd's web site, I don't seem to be getting any of these messages...] Lauri Watts writes: > someone else wrote: > > 2) Ports should fundamentally support the use of "recommended" > > dependencies and not "hard" dependencies.. in packages too. > > This would be fabulous. Then we wouldn't have to turn around and > repeat this conversation over TeTex and SDL :) > > > 4) KDE could remove CUPS from kdelibs dependencies. > > > > From my point of view, the best (perhaps not the easiest or > > quickest) solution is #3, simply because it accounts for other > > cases where someone might get confused because of the conflict. > > Best longterm. For the shortterm, option 4 may fulfill "quick and > easy" if not necessarily best. I'm not sure how long it would take to do #3, but if it isn't too long then that sounds interesting to me. I am not looking for a fix which must be done right this second, but I would like something so I can at least feel that people who do not use cups will not run into this problem after a month or two. Given how many times I have gotten email about this, it is embarrassing how long it can take me to help pin down the problem for someone who just hit it. My guess is that it would take awhile to do "suggested" dependencies, and I also do not know how that would fit in with packages (where someone will have to build multiple packages for KDE, one with cups and one without it). > How I'd do it: Make one port of kdelibs with cups as a dependency, > and one without. Enforce it with --disable-cups in the configure > args for the no-cups version, just to make sure people are getting > exactly what they asked for. I'd like to suggest the default > kdelibs = kde-with-cups, and make the no-cups version the different > one. Naming them this way should then make it obvious what's going > on for admins too. I suspect it would work better if the no-cups version was the default. The people who know what cups is will immediately understand the significance of "kde-with-cups" would mean, whereas someone who is not looking for cups is likely to just install whatever "kde" is. Not only that, but if you are using cups, and you install the wrong kde port, then your problem is that "printing does not work write in KDE". The administrator who has installed cups is going to have an easy time making the connection. The person who is not using cups, but installs the kde-with-cups port (because it was the one named simply "kde") will have this failure mode where printing works for some people, and doesn't work for other people. Not only that, but the person who it isn't working for may see problems even when they are logged in at a virtual console or ssh connection -- which is to say, they are not even using KDE. It is harder to make the connection between the problem and the cause of the problem. It would help a lot if there were some way for a mistaken install of cups to result in a much more understandable symptom. Perhaps I can come up with something for that (as the maintainer of the standard lpr). -- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@eclipse.acs.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or gad@freebsd.org Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or drosehn@rpi.edu From: Lauri Watts To: Garance A Drosehn Cc: kde-freebsd@lists.csociety.org, kde@FreeBSD.org, desmo@bandwidth.org, jah4007@cs.rit.edu, FreeBSD-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: [kde-freebsd] Re: ports/32321: x11/kdelibs2 installs print/cups, which then causes problems Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 02:25:27 +0100 On Wednesday 28 November 2001 00.44, Garance A Drosehn wrote: > [again, I am answering this by reading the PR from freebsd's web > site, I don't seem to be getting any of these messages...] Hopefully you will be getting this one. KDEprint is incredibly powerful, no matter what printing system you have installed. It supports rather well the native BSD printing system, but there is no doubt that the CUPS support is the most complete of all the printing systems. I suspect you will find this page interesting, it explains much better than I can what kdeprint is and can do: http://printing.kde.org/info/ Actually the whole site is interesting reading for those interested in printing matters. I also think you may be interested in assisting Michael Goffioul round out the support for BSD's printing - it is actually the default printing system offered if CUPS is not found. > I suspect it would work better if the no-cups version was the default. > The people who know what cups is will immediately understand the > significance of "kde-with-cups" would mean, whereas someone who is > not looking for cups is likely to just install whatever "kde" is. I really have no preference - either way, the users should be kept happy, which is the main concern in the end. Regards, -- Lauri Watts From: James Halstead To: Alan Eldridge Cc: freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org, kde-freebsd@lists.csociety.org, gad@freebsd.org, kde@freebsd.org, will@csociety.org, leimbacd@bellsouth.net Subject: Re: ports/32321: x11/kdelibs2 installs print cups, which then causes problem Date: 29 Nov 2001 07:38:49 +0500 Message received... I forget to check my mail for *one* day and big things break out ;P I have actually been meaning to split up the cups port into two ports since I got the maintainership a little while back. I have just started to do so, but now I am not sure it is the best way. In any case, I am working on a split up and I will soon announce any changes that should be made for cups dependencies. [more technical discussion follows] Approach 1: My first thoughts, and this ended up being fairly easy, was to just make a libcups port which basically patches the main makefile to only do the make and make install from the cups-1.1.12/cups subdir. This will install the libcups lib and headers only, not the libcupsimage library. It also fails to install the cups-config script, but that can be fixed. This approach seems to work, but I am thinking something different might be better, consider approach 2: The BSD and SYSV printing systems reside in the berkeley and systemv subdirs respectively. My second approach would be to have the port now named cups install everything *but* the programs built from those two dirs (and their respective man pages as well...), then to create a new port (say cups-bin or something) which will only install those tools, It should not be too hard to accomplish. I think the second may be a better solution. I am pretty sure that cups is fully functional without the bsd and sysv printing binaries. This way cups could be used by kde, with full printing ability, but not stomp on other lp* binaries. If users wanted the command line printing ability then they could install the cup-bin port to get it. Advantage of '1' is that the libcups package would be small and out of the way for people that did not want cups, however the disadvantage is that it is not at all useful without the main cups port. Advantage of '2' is that cups should be fully able to print once cupsd is started. The disadvantage is that people that did not want to use cups would have to get a larger package as a dependency (this is only a point for packages, the port has to grab the same archive either way). Thoughts? For those interested I am going to place patches/shell archives to both methods in this area (method 1 is there now): http://www.rit.edu/~jah4007/FreeBSD/cups/ James From: James Halstead To: freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org Cc: Alan Eldridge , kde-freebsd@lists.csociety.org, gad@freebsd.org, kde@freebsd.org, will@csociety.org, leimbacd@bellsouth.net Subject: Re: ports/32321: x11/kdelibs2 installs print cups, which then causes problem Date: 29 Nov 2001 10:18:09 +0500 Just a final note that I have put up the new port, and patches for method 2: http://www.rit.edu/~jah4007/FreeBSD/cups/newcups-2/ This is my preffered version at the moment, if for no other reason then nobody has to change their dependancy to get the new effect. in order to clobber lpr and friends you would have to install the cups-bin port (any suggestions on the name?) James From: Alan Eldridge To: James Halstead Cc: freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org, kde-freebsd@lists.csociety.org, gad@freebsd.org, kde@freebsd.org, will@csociety.org, leimbacd@bellsouth.net Subject: Re: [kde-freebsd] Re: ports/32321: x11/kdelibs2 installs print cups, which then causes problem Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 01:19:55 -0500 On Thu, Nov 29, 2001 at 10:18:09AM +0500, James Halstead wrote: >Just a final note that I have put up the new port, and patches for >method 2: http://www.rit.edu/~jah4007/FreeBSD/cups/newcups-2/ This is my >preffered version at the moment, if for no other reason then nobody has >to change their dependancy to get the new effect. in order to clobber >lpr and friends you would have to install the cups-bin port (any >suggestions on the name?) I prefer #2 as well. One I've thought about it, installing the headers and libs, while enough for KDE to work, is sufficient only for buildling other software, not for running it, nor for the users. That is, runtime still needs cupsd; users still need the docs, etc., even if they aren't gonna use the lp* programs. HEY! Cupsd can probably even forward to BSD lpd as if it was a *remote* lpr printer daemon.... oooh, how 'bout that? BSD lpr or LPRng and cups co-existing, and even printing to the same printers? Wow! There's an idea! Names? Lemme see... There oughta be a meta-port, cups, which builds/packages/installs the other two, so someone can still 'cd ports/print/cups && make install' and get what they expect. For the libs, headers, and docs: How about cups-libs? cups-runtime? For the lpr-programs: How about cups-lp[r] or cups-lp[r]-bin? That's what it *is*. I think any name should have lp or lpr in the name. I don't like cups-bin because I would expect that the cupsd daemon, being a binary, would be in cups-bin. -- Alan Eldridge #include free(sklyarov); From: Alan Eldridge To: James Halstead Cc: freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org, kde-freebsd@lists.csociety.org, gad@freebsd.org, kde@freebsd.org, will@csociety.org, leimbacd@bellsouth.net Subject: Re: [kde-freebsd] Re: ports/32321: x11/kdelibs2 installs print cups, which then causes problem Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 01:28:15 -0500 On Thu, Nov 29, 2001 at 10:18:09AM +0500, James Halstead wrote: >Just a final note that I have put up the new port, and patches for >method 2: http://www.rit.edu/~jah4007/FreeBSD/cups/newcups-2/ This is my >preffered version at the moment, if for no other reason then nobody has >to change their dependancy to get the new effect. in order to clobber >lpr and friends you would have to install the cups-bin port (any >suggestions on the name?) Once this is all sorted out, shall we pass the idea along to Michael Sweet (mike@easysw.com) to see if he'd support the two install targets? -- Alan Eldridge #include free(sklyarov); From: James Halstead To: Alan Eldridge Cc: freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org, kde-freebsd@lists.csociety.org, gad@freebsd.org, kde@freebsd.org, will@csociety.org, leimbacd@bellsouth.net Subject: Re: [kde-freebsd] Re: ports/32321: x11/kdelibs2 installs print cups, which then causes problem Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 08:30:27 -0500 On Thursday 29 November 2001 01:19 am, Alan Eldridge wrote: [...] > > There oughta be a meta-port, cups, which builds/packages/installs the other > two, so someone can still 'cd ports/print/cups && make install' and get > what they expect. I think leaving the cups port to be the main install, lacking just the bsd and system V printing will be a good thing. This way nobody has to change their dependency to be 'safe' from clobbering things later. > > For the libs, headers, and docs: How about cups-libs? cups-runtime? If I were to make cups a meta port, and split off both other parts I would call the main one cups-base, as that is really what it is. > > For the lpr-programs: How about cups-lp[r] or cups-lp[r]-bin? That's what > it *is*. I think any name should have lp or lpr in the name. I don't like > cups-bin because I would expect that the cupsd daemon, being a binary, > would be in cups-bin. with those two, I would probably go with cups-lpr, or maby something like cups-commandline. Any votes on the name? More importantly, has anybody tested the new ports? I am most curious to know how well it will work without the current named cups-bin port. James From: Will Andrews To: Alan Eldridge Cc: James Halstead , freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org, kde-freebsd@lists.csociety.org, gad@freebsd.org, kde@freebsd.org, will@csociety.org, leimbacd@bellsouth.net Subject: Re: [kde-freebsd] Re: ports/32321: x11/kdelibs2 installs print cups, which then causes problem Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 08:27:11 -0500 On Thu, Nov 29, 2001 at 01:19:55AM -0500, Alan Eldridge wrote: > For the libs, headers, and docs: How about cups-libs? cups-runtime? Don't break things up unnecessarily. James, you should just have a regular cups port that DTRT and doesn't break POLA, and have a separate cups-libs port for those who need it, like KDE. -- wca From: Alan Eldridge To: Will Andrews Cc: James Halstead , freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org, kde-freebsd@lists.csociety.org, gad@freebsd.org, kde@freebsd.org, leimbacd@bellsouth.net Subject: Re: [kde-freebsd] Re: ports/32321: x11/kdelibs2 installs print cups, which then causes problem Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 08:43:03 -0500 On Thu, Nov 29, 2001 at 08:27:11AM -0500, Will Andrews wrote: >On Thu, Nov 29, 2001 at 01:19:55AM -0500, Alan Eldridge wrote: >> For the libs, headers, and docs: How about cups-libs? cups-runtime? > >Don't break things up unnecessarily. Those were alternatives. :) I just meant 2 packages, e.g. cups-lpr and cups-libs. I still do think a meta-port, like kde's top level "driver" port, is a reasonable idea, though. -- Alan Eldridge #include free(sklyarov); From: James Halstead To: Will Andrews , Alan Eldridge Cc: James Halstead , freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org, kde-freebsd@lists.csociety.org, gad@freebsd.org, kde@freebsd.org, will@csociety.org, leimbacd@bellsouth.net Subject: Re: [kde-freebsd] Re: ports/32321: x11/kdelibs2 installs print cups, which then causes problem Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 09:17:49 -0500 On Thursday 29 November 2001 08:27 am, Will Andrews wrote: > On Thu, Nov 29, 2001 at 01:19:55AM -0500, Alan Eldridge wrote: > > For the libs, headers, and docs: How about cups-libs? cups-runtime? > > Don't break things up unnecessarily. > James, you should just have a regular cups port that DTRT and > doesn't break POLA, and have a separate cups-libs port for those > who need it, like KDE. I would not be against moving what is the print/cups port to a new cups-base port, keeping my new cups-bin port (as another name) then having the current cups port be a meta port which installs both. This way, anybody installing 'cups' will DTRT and will be basically the same as before, and people that just need to build and link against cups, can do so without harming things by using cups-base. That way everybody can be happy ;P. This will be a simple change against the current newcups-2 state of things. The only difference about this way and the current way will be that anybody depending on cups will have to change it to cups-base. I will make the change and upload it, after I get home from work today. James From: Will Andrews To: James Halstead Cc: Will Andrews , Alan Eldridge , freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org, kde-freebsd@lists.csociety.org, gad@freebsd.org, kde@freebsd.org, leimbacd@bellsouth.net Subject: Re: [kde-freebsd] Re: ports/32321: x11/kdelibs2 installs print cups, which then causes problem Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 10:24:29 -0500 On Thu, Nov 29, 2001 at 09:17:49AM -0500, James Halstead wrote: > I would not be against moving what is the print/cups port to a new cups-base > port, keeping my new cups-bin port (as another name) then having the current > cups port be a meta port which installs both. > > This way, anybody installing 'cups' will DTRT and will be basically the same > as before, and people that just need to build and link against cups, can do > so without harming things by using cups-base. That way everybody can be happy > ;P. This will be a simple change against the current newcups-2 state of > things. Sounds good to me. :-) > The only difference about this way and the current way will be that anybody > depending on cups will have to change it to cups-base. Why? If you change cups to a metaport it shouldn't be any different from the old way. > I will make the change and upload it, after I get home from work today. Thanks. -- wca From: James Halstead To: Will Andrews Cc: Alan Eldridge , freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org, kde-freebsd@lists.csociety.org, gad@freebsd.org, kde@freebsd.org, leimbacd@bellsouth.net Subject: Re: [kde-freebsd] Re: ports/32321: x11/kdelibs2 installs print cups, which then causes problem Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 11:28:10 -0500 On Thursday 29 November 2001 10:24 am, you wrote: [snip] > Why? If you change cups to a metaport it shouldn't be any > different from the old way. It will not work perfectly as expected when doing builds from ports, depending on how you setup the dependency. In any case it would not always be consistant with the results. Currently people look for cups.2 as a libdepend for cups. If they leave it as is, and the user installs cups-base, then the dependency will pass without installing all of cups as might be expected. OTOH, the whole point of doing this is so that people can depend on cups and not accidently clobber other printing systems, the way to do that is just depend on cups.2 with cups-base as the port pointed to. If you want all of cups, including the lpr tools, you have to depend on cups-bin, or cups, but not by using cups.2 as a libdepend. I will have to look into some other way to depend on the entire cups dist. Actually now that I think about it, I am not sure exactly what to use as the dependency for cups-bin, as the only files installed by cups-bin are the lp* tools, which are also installed by other ports :-/. Wait a minute, cupsaddsmb is actually installed as part of the systemv stuff. Not sure why the dist has that file in the systemv dir, but it might make for a good dependency tracker. James From: Garance A Drosihn To: Will Andrews , James Halstead Cc: Will Andrews , Alan Eldridge , freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org, kde-freebsd@lists.csociety.org, gad@freebsd.org, kde@freebsd.org, leimbacd@bellsouth.net Subject: Re: [kde-freebsd] Re: ports/32321: x11/kdelibs2 installs print cups, which then causes problem Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 13:08:51 -0500 At 10:24 AM -0500 11/29/01, Will Andrews wrote: >On Thu, Nov 29, 2001 at 09:17:49AM -0500, James Halstead wrote: > > The only difference about this way and the current way will be that > > anybody depending on cups will have to change it to cups-base. > >Why? If you change cups to a metaport it shouldn't be any >different from the old way. A port such as KDE would need to be changed to "cups-base", because it does *not* want to force the install of alternate 'lpr', etc. In my opinion, it is pretty reasonable to expect KDE to make that change. In my current ports tree, the following are the only ports which list print/cups as a dependency: ./net/samba/Makefile ./net/samba-devel/Makefile ./print/xpp/Makefile ./x11/kdelibs2/Makefile If we say that 'cups-base' does not install lpr, and that the 'cups' meta-port does install it, then XPP does not need to change, as that *is* a graphical front-end to CUPS, and it would be pretty odd to install on a system which isn't using CUPS. KDE should depend on cups-base, because it should not trigger the installation of the alternate lpr. I don't know if samba should depend on cups-base or cups, because I don't know what it's doing with cups, but that is the only other port where we even have to care about this question. Speaking with my sysadmin hat on, I would expect the port named 'cups' to install all of cups, including the replacements for lpr. So, I like the idea of having cups-base, and changing KDE (and samba?) to depend on cups-base. > > I will make the change and upload it, after I get home from work >> today. > >Thanks. Yes, thanks for finding the time to work on this. I think it will be very helpful to users if we sort this out. -- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@eclipse.acs.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or gad@freebsd.org Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or drosih@rpi.edu From: James Halstead To: Garance A Drosihn , Will Andrews Cc: Will Andrews , Alan Eldridge , freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org, kde-freebsd@lists.csociety.org, gad@freebsd.org, kde@freebsd.org, leimbacd@bellsouth.net Subject: Re: [kde-freebsd] Re: ports/32321: x11/kdelibs2 installs print cups, which then causes problem Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 15:39:00 -0500 On Thursday 29 November 2001 13:08 pm, Garance A Drosihn wrote: > In my current ports tree, the following are the only ports which list > print/cups as a dependency: > ./net/samba/Makefile > ./net/samba-devel/Makefile > ./print/xpp/Makefile > ./x11/kdelibs2/Makefile > > If we say that 'cups-base' does not install lpr, and that the 'cups' > meta-port does install it, then XPP does not need to change, as that > *is* a graphical front-end to CUPS, and it would be pretty odd to > install on a system which isn't using CUPS. Actually I don't know if even xpp should use the main cups port. Cups is functional on it's own without the bsd and system V binaries that cause the conflict. Depending on how this port uses cups it may not need them. I think these ports use cups through the cups libraries, hence the need for the compile time library depend. (even samba I think). So really all ports should depend on cups-base, and leave it to the user to decide if they want to install lpr tools. cups-base does put up a message that it is not installing the command line stuff, and hopefully people will see that message and know what to do. Or else they will email me and I can give them a nudge in the right direction ;P > KDE should depend on cups-base, because it should not trigger the > installation of the alternate lpr. > > I don't know if samba should depend on cups-base or cups, because I > don't know what it's doing with cups, but that is the only other > port where we even have to care about this question. James From: James Halstead To: Will Andrews , Alan Eldridge Cc: freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org, kde-freebsd@lists.csociety.org, gad@freebsd.org, kde@freebsd.org, will@csociety.org, leimbacd@bellsouth.net Subject: Re: [kde-freebsd] Re: ports/32321: x11/kdelibs2 installs print cups, which then causes problem Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 21:18:06 -0500 Ok, here we go. http://www.rit.edu/~jah4007/FreeBSD/cups/newcups There are two shell archives for the new sub ports, and a patch to make the main cups port into a meta port (don't forget to remove the files listed in the README). Just look at the cups meta port for what to use as dependencies. Please review these, and if I don't hear any commit volunteers (assuming there are no problems) then I will submit an update pr next week. Once this gets committed, I will email the maintainers of samba, xpp, and well, kde already is listening ;P about the dependency change. James From: Alan Eldridge To: James Halstead Cc: Will Andrews , freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org, kde-freebsd@lists.csociety.org, gad@freebsd.org, kde@freebsd.org, leimbacd@bellsouth.net Subject: Re: [kde-freebsd] Re: ports/32321: x11/kdelibs2 installs print cups, which then causes problem Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 13:07:48 -0500 On Thu, Nov 29, 2001 at 09:18:06PM -0500, James Halstead wrote: >Ok, here we go. > >http://www.rit.edu/~jah4007/FreeBSD/cups/newcups > >There are two shell archives for the new sub ports, and a patch to make the >main cups port into a meta port (don't forget to remove the files listed in >the README). Just look at the cups meta port for what to use as dependencies. > >Please review these, and if I don't hear any commit volunteers (assuming >there are no problems) then I will submit an update pr next week. Once this >gets committed, I will email the maintainers of samba, xpp, and well, kde >already is listening ;P about the dependency change. I'm building and testing it with kdelibs 2.2.2 release-candidate-we-hope this afternoon. -- Alan Eldridge #include free(sklyarov); Responsible-Changed-From-To: ports->freebsd-ports Responsible-Changed-By: petef Responsible-Changed-When: Mon Dec 3 11:16:26 PST 2001 Responsible-Changed-Why: Misfiled. http://www.FreeBSD.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=32321 State-Changed-From-To: open->closed State-Changed-By: will State-Changed-When: Mon Dec 3 17:16:09 PST 2001 State-Changed-Why: Problem solved, thanks for your feedback. http://www.FreeBSD.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=32321 >Unformatted: