Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.org.usenix:3274 comp.unix.bsd:11583 comp.org.sug:658 comp.os.386bsd.misc:57 Newsgroups: comp.org.usenix,comp.unix.bsd,comp.org.sug,comp.os.386bsd.misc Path: sserve!manuel.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!news.Hawaii.Edu!ames!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!menudo.uh.edu!uuneo!sugar!peter From: peter@NeoSoft.com (Peter da Silva) Subject: Re: How to vote on POSIX Printing Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900 Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1993 01:52:51 GMT Message-ID: <C38nw5.7pp@sugar.neosoft.com> References: <C36JrI.E8K@ra.nrl.navy.mil> <C37Kwn.Hx5@sugar.neosoft.com> <C37x6s.88x@ra.nrl.navy.mil> Lines: 22 In article <C37x6s.88x@ra.nrl.navy.mil> atkinson@itd.nrl.navy.mil (Randall Atkinson) writes: > Palladium, as per the specification in the POSIX Mock Ballot which I > looked at and tried to comment on, does NOT conform to the BSD lpr > commands I'm not talking about the commands. I'm taling about the facilities provided to the user by the software. The command bindings are pretty much irrelevant, but an lpr interface (with a strict set of filters) would be a lot easier than the lp interface (with arbitrary filters and options). > Join the POSIX ballot group, and if you look at the POSIX proposal > and think that it will work fine, then vote yes. I didn't say it'd work fine, though I'm sure it can be made to. I said that it's failing is that it's not enough of an advance to justify randomly changing things, and that printing is too narrow for a POSIX level standard anyway. -- Peter da Silva. <peter@sugar.neosoft.com>. `-_-' Oletko halannut suttasi tänään? 'U` Tarjoilija, tämä ateria elää vielä.