*BSD News Article 12089


Return to BSD News archive

Xref: sserve comp.org.usenix:3272 comp.unix.bsd:11574 comp.org.sug:656 comp.os.386bsd.misc:52
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!spool.mu.edu!enterpoop.mit.edu!paperboy.osf.org!paperboy.osf.org!duke
From: duke@osf.org (Duke Robillard)
Subject: Re: How to vote on POSIX Printing
In-Reply-To: peter@NeoSoft.com's message of Mon, 1 Mar 1993 11:50:46 GMT
Message-ID: <DUKE.93Mar1134042@portal.osf.org>
Lines: 31
Sender: news@osf.org (USENET News System)
Organization: Open Software Foundation
References: <C36JrI.E8K@ra.nrl.navy.mil> <C37Kwn.Hx5@sugar.neosoft.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Mar 1993 18:40:45 GMT
Lines: 31


In article <C37Kwn.Hx5@sugar.neosoft.com> peter@NeoSoft.com (Peter da Silva) writes:

   Actually, Palladium (based on the papers I FTP-ed on the subject) appears
   to be a derived at least in the design from Berkeley "lpr". 

I don't believe that's really true.  It's a client-server system, so
it has that in common with lpr, but it was all re-done from scratch.

   and only slightly improves its extensibility in the area of file formats
   and conversions. 

Well, not really.  There is tremendously more flexibility in Palladium
than in lpr.  It's much, much bigger.

   It seems mainly of interest to very large networks that are
   more-or-less homogenous. 

If by "homogenous" you mean "POSIX-compliant" then I agree.

   It is not, as some have claimed, a general batch
   queue mechanism, 

That's true, it's very print specific.  That's because it's an implementation
of the ISO Print Standard.

--
Bob Robillard, Technical Editor 1003.7.1, duke@cc.bellcore.com