[6526] in Release_7.7_team
Re: lprm for normal users doesn't work
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Geoffrey Thomas)
Mon Nov 23 08:20:55 2009
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 08:20:08 -0500 (EST)
From: Geoffrey Thomas <geofft@MIT.EDU>
To: "Mark W. Manley" <mmanley@mit.edu>
cc: ops@mit.edu, release-team@mit.edu, debathena@mit.edu
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.0911230749310.30071@green-arrow.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0911230812580.28415@dr-wily.mit.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.00
On Mon, 23 Nov 2009, Mark W. Manley wrote:
> That you have to point directly at the CUPS server in question (e.g.
> print-this) is a totally known quantity that I mentioned at least twice. I
> even mentioned it in the release team meeting again on Friday. That's
> because when you submit a print job to the printers.mit.edu system, any one
> of four servers will take the job, then bounce the jobs internally to the
> final server (the one in Hesiod) for spooling to the printer. This way,
> there aren't multiple servers trying to compete to send a job to the same
> printer and there is a single server against which you can point clients like
> lprm and cancel(*) to abort your jobs.
Yeah, I'd heard this, but it never really registered that this applied to
regular users running lprm in addition to printadm folks. (I guess there's
no technical reason why they'd differ.)
> I can make the server short names work. I just put in the changes into the
> CUPS configuration files and it should take effect by 11 today (I'll just let
> the normal restarts take the changes). After that, you should be able to
> point to sawmill and not to sawmill.mit.edu and what not.
Awesome.
> So for now, we just have to live with the methodology of looking up the
> queue and directing queue operations there (a wrapper would be totes
> useful and would be easy to write).
Debathena people - have we started patching our wrapper or should I do
that now?
--
Geoffrey Thomas
geofft@mit.edu
