[cups] Cups default/private job options

[Leopold Palomo-Avellaneda]

El 7/3/19 a les 21:07, Gene Heskett ha escrit:
> On Thursday 07 March 2019 13:29:45 Leopold Palomo-Avellaneda wrote:
> 
>> Hi!!
>>
>> El 7/3/19 a les 16:41, Axel Braun ha escrit:
>>> Am 6. März 2019 19:38:11 GMT-03:00 schrieb Leopold Palomo-Avellaneda 
> <leo at alaxarxa.net>:
>>>> Helge,
>>>>
>>>> El 6/3/19 a les 21:25, Helge Blischke ha escrit:
>>>>>> Am 06.03.2019 um 15:33 schrieb Leopold Palomo-Avellaneda
>>>>
>>>> <leo at alaxarxa.net>:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have a cups server configured and working in a Debiab Stretch
>>>>
>>>> (cups 2.2.1). We
>>>>
>>>>>> have a new Konica Minolta printer C258 that has an authentication
>>>>
>>>> system.
>>>>
>>>>>> The manufacturer has some non public ppd and driver where you can
>>>>
>>>> define the
>>>>
>>>>>> user and pass in the Default options at the web cups front-end.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The system is working but in some cases, (for instance okular or
>>>>
>>>> some
>>>>
>>>>>> sophisticated apps) are setting all the options (including the
>>>>
>>>> default), and
>>>>
>>>>>> that parameters are not respected and send correctly to the
>>>>>> printer.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So my questions are:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - can I fix in some way that default options to be non modifiable
>>>>>> by
>>>>
>>>> the user?
>>>>
>>>>>> - or, can I hide that options in some way that the apps cannot
>>>>>> set
>>>>
>>>> or see that
>>>>
>>>>>> parameters?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Leopold
>>>>>
>>>>> Please post the PPD for this printer you are using.
>>>>> NOTE: you need to add the extension ".txt“ to the file name
>>>>> because
>>>>
>>>> the list eliminates
>>>>
>>>>> all attachments which are not text files.
>>>>
>>>> I'm sorry, but I can't. The license prohibits to transfer the
>>>> files.
>>>
>>> Then  you should contact the manufacturer to fix his proprietary
>>> sh**
>>
>> yes, you are right. I have done that, but in general from my
>> experience of more than 20 years advocating for free software is that
>> in general there's no knowledge and just fear. The license file had
>> more that 20 years and has no sense.
> 
> Is there any provision in that license file that would prevent the 
> publishing of that file?

I don't know ...

> One of the strongest ideas when its 20 year old boiler plate that hasn't 
> a heck of a lot to do with todays tech, seems like making such a license 
> public so it, and the entity useing it can be held up to a wee bit of 
> ridicule, will be more force to get it changed than a 100K$ suit for 
> damages because the product cannot be made to work within the terms of 
> that license. They'll automaticly defend against the suit, but the bad 
> PR will or should, make them take a closer look at that license.
> 
> Just a thought...

Well, I'll ask about change the license. But I'm not optimist ...

Cheers,

Leopold

-- 
--
Linux User 152692     GPG: 05F4A7A949A2D9AA
Catalonia
-------------------------------------
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?