Networking problem trying to set up CUPS

Post by Mike Spencer
The easiest way to start is by using the web interface to
configure your printer. Go to "http://localhost:631" and choose
the Administration tab at the top of the page.
Okay, but I want to access that (on enoch, the new 15 install box)
from bogus, my current 14.2 main machine. Try http://enoch:631.
The connection was refused when attempting to contact enoch:631

Expected, the cups default is to only listen for connections on the
loopback interface (as a security precation).

Post by Mike Spencer
# Only listen for connections from the local machine.
Listen localhost:631
Listen /var/run/cups/cups.sock
# mds -- Also listen for conns from bogus;
Listen 192.168.0.15:631

Per the docs, you should change the "Listen localhost:631" line to
"Listen *:631" and cupsd should then also listen to connections on your
ethernet interface as well. And, what is the IP address you have on
the second Listen? The IP that goes there would need to be the IP of
the machine the cupsd was running on, not the IP the connections would
be coming from.

Peter 'Shaggy' Haywood

2023-02-22 01:32:10 UTC

Groovy hepcat Rich was jivin' in alt.os.linux.slackware on Tue, 21 Feb
2023 01:55 pm. It's a cool scene! Dig it.

Post by Rich
ethernet interface as well. And, what is the IP address you have on
the second Listen? The IP that goes there would need to be the IP of
the machine the cupsd was running on, not the IP the connections would
be coming from.

Technically, it's the IP address of the /interface/, not the whole
machine. The computer doesn't have an address; the network interface
does.

--
----- Dig the NEW and IMPROVED news sig!! -----

-------------- Shaggy was here! ---------------
Ain't I'm a dawg!!

Rich

2023-02-22 13:28:02 UTC

Post by Peter 'Shaggy' Haywood
Groovy hepcat Rich was jivin' in alt.os.linux.slackware on Tue, 21 Feb
2023 01:55 pm. It's a cool scene! Dig it.

Technically, it's the IP address of the /interface/, not the whole
machine. The computer doesn't have an address; the network interface
does.

While true, I doubt the OP has a multi-interface machine such that the
distinction would have done any good besides add to his confusion.

Henrik Carlqvist

2023-02-21 06:34:59 UTC

Post by Mike Spencer
I gave up on postfix and reverted with complete success to sendmail.
Now venturing to migrate from lprng to CUPS.

Sorry I can't answer any cups related question. Like you I am old school
and didn't even try postfix on 15.0. Instead I simply kept running
sendmail and I installed LPRng from third party sources as it no longer
is included in Slackware even in /extra.

regards Henrik

Mike Spencer

2023-03-05 23:14:03 UTC

Post by Mike Spencer
I gave up on postfix and reverted with complete success to sendmail.
Now venturing to migrate from lprng to CUPS.

Thanks for the encouragement to believe lprng would work with 15.0.

But here's a thing:

After dumping CUPS and installing lprng-3.8.28-i486-1.tgz from a
previous Slackware release package, it complained:

libssl.so.0 not found
libcrypto.so.0 not found

to which I responded:

ln -s /usr/lib/libssl.so.1.1 /usr/lib/libssl.so.0 (15.0)
ln -s /usr/lib/libcrypto.so.1.1 /usr/lib/libcrypto.so.0 (15.0)

and it seems to be working fine. I did the same thing with 14.2 with
no problems so far:

ln -s /lib/libssl.so.1.0.0 /lib/libssl.so.0 (14.2)
ln -s /lib/libcrypto.so.1.0.0 /lib/libcrypto.so.0 (14.2)

Is this likely to cause unexpected problems down the road? (I've had
mixed results in the past with this sort of ill-informed lib hack.)

Should I be looking for an lprng release newer thann 3.8.28 that
doesn't have xx.so.0 libs hard-coded? Where you found yours,
perhaps?

The only reason I was messing with CUPS was that, on 14.2, Seamonkey
would *only* "print to file" until you wrote what I would never have

Post by Henrik Carlqvist
It used to be possible to print with firefox by having a file
-8<--------------
gtk-print-backends = "lpr,file"
-8<--------------
If I recall correctly that hack stopped working starting on firefox
version 50 and later.

I needn't have bothered. Seamonky 2.53.10.2 recognizes and offerrs
lpr as a print option without any gtk hack and it works with lpr(1).

Tnx,

--
Mike Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada

Henrik Carlqvist

2023-03-06 06:54:20 UTC

Post by Mike Spencer
After dumping CUPS and installing lprng-3.8.28-i486-1.tgz from a
libssl.so.0 not found libcrypto.so.0 not found
ln -s /usr/lib/libssl.so.1.1 /usr/lib/libssl.so.0 (15.0)
ln -s /usr/lib/libcrypto.so.1.1 /usr/lib/libcrypto.so.0 (15.0)
and it seems to be working fine. I did the same thing with 14.2 with no
ln -s /lib/libssl.so.1.0.0 /lib/libssl.so.0 (14.2)
ln -s /lib/libcrypto.so.1.0.0 /lib/libcrypto.so.0 (14.2)
Is this likely to cause unexpected problems down the road? (I've had
mixed results in the past with this sort of ill-informed lib hack.)

I can't say if that dynamic library symlinking is going to cause trouble.
On my 15.0 system I have compiled LPRng from source, downloaded the
source from https://lprng.sourceforge.net/download.html

Post by Mike Spencer
Should I be looking for an lprng release newer thann 3.8.28 that doesn't
have xx.so.0 libs hard-coded? Where you found yours, perhaps?

The version I got from sourceforge was 3.8.C, that file seems to be from
2012 but seems newer than 3.8.28 as it mentions 3.8.32 in the ChangeLog.

Thanks for the tip about SeaMonkey! It is slightly annoying having to
print to file with FireFox.

regards Henrik

Mike Spencer

2023-03-08 05:25:46 UTC

Post by Mike Spencer
ln -s /usr/lib/libssl.so.1.1 /usr/lib/libssl.so.0 (15.0)
ln -s /usr/lib/libcrypto.so.1.1 /usr/lib/libcrypto.so.0 (15.0)
and it seems to be working fine.
Is this likely to cause unexpected problems down the road?

I can't say if that dynamic library symlinking is going to cause trouble.
On my 15.0 system I have compiled LPRng from source, downloaded the
source from https://lprng.sourceforge.net/download.html

Post by Mike Spencer
Should I be looking for an lprng release newer thann 3.8.28 that doesn't
have xx.so.0 libs hard-coded? Where you found yours, perhaps?

The version I got from sourceforge was 3.8.C, that file seems to be from
2012 but seems newer than 3.8.28 as it mentions 3.8.32 in the ChangeLog.

Downloaded and unpacked 3.8.C. I see ChangeLog has:

2011-10-26 brl drop --with-ssl, use autoconf macros to look for libssl
2008-03-29 brl really only link programs needing it to ssl libraries

so they've apparently changed how libssl is referenced somehow.
("somehow" because configure and automake are above my pay grade. :-)

If the softlink lib hacks cause a problem -- unlikely because only old
versions of anything would explicitly reference an old lib -- I can
compile 3.8.C, install it & delete the links.

Tnx for the pointer.

Post by Henrik Carlqvist
Thanks for the tip about SeaMonkey! It is slightly annoying having to
print to file with FireFox.

Yes. I don't have a word processor. On the very rare occasions that I
need to print a business letter, I compose it in simple HTML and print
from the browser. One more small irritation eliminated, eh? All good.

--
Mike Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada

Henrik Carlqvist

2023-03-08 20:48:37 UTC

Post by Mike Spencer
I don't have a word processor. On the very rare occasions that I
need to print a business letter, I compose it in simple HTML and print
from the browser. One more small irritation eliminated, eh? All good.

HTML might work, but if you want really nice letters you should learn
latex!

I have written some scripts using dialogs to input data about receiver
and what to pay for and then the script generates latex code which is
processed to a pdf file with the invoice.

regards Henrik

Mike Spencer

2023-03-11 07:24:07 UTC

Post by Mike Spencer
I don't have a word processor. On the very rare occasions that I
need to print a business letter, I compose it in simple HTML and print
from the browser.

HTML might work, but if you want really nice letters you should learn
latex!

Ha! Until ca. '92 I used -- I forget, was it WordStar? -- a markup
word processor on CP/M with a dot matrix printer, business letters,
blacksmithing newsletter, assorted. So when I was learning DOS, C,
Unix, Emacs and other new stuff around then, I actually bought
Knuth's TEXbook because I'd been told it was a markup system -- "you
should learn latex!" as you say.

But when I went to my shiny new Linux system a few years later, it had
Latex or Tetex or something that was a dialect of TEX. I bumbled
about a bit but never found a tutorial that was simple enough to just,
yew kno, bang out a nice page. All seemed too much like learning a
new programming language (yeah, I know what a macro is but...) to
become a pro compositor.

With little printing to do and many other things to occupy my time, I
slacked off and never learned to use it. Still have Knuth's book.

Is there an online tutorial PDF for Latex that's simple-minded? I'm
never going to compose a glossy magazine page, advanced scientific
paper or legal brief and my ageing brain isn't going to master a mass
of arcana to be used, say, once a quarter.

Post by Henrik Carlqvist
I have written some scripts using dialogs to input data about receiver
and what to pay for and then the script generates latex code which is
processed to a pdf file with the invoice.

All good. I'm trying to imagine needing that....nope. :-)

--
Mike Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada

Martin Schöön

2023-03-11 09:25:03 UTC

Post by Mike Spencer
Is there an online tutorial PDF for Latex that's simple-minded? I'm
never going to compose a glossy magazine page, advanced scientific
paper or legal brief and my ageing brain isn't going to master a mass
of arcana to be used, say, once a quarter.

I have been using LaTeX since the early 90s so I am not the best person
to answer this as I don't remember how it was to learn LaTeX. I think
we had a book by Leslie Lamport and it was not a heavy read. Also,
I think there was a basic sample document show casing the basics. I
don't seem to be able to locate any of that quickly on the internet
right now -- maybe dated.

However, this might be useful: https://www.andy-roberts.net/latex/

Disclaimer: I have not studied this web site myself.

And, of course: https://www.latex-project.org

Then you could always cheat and use LyX: https://www.lyx.org

/Martin

Henrik Carlqvist

2023-03-11 10:13:35 UTC

Ha! Until ca. '92 I used -- I forget, was it WordStar? -- a markup word
processor on CP/M with a dot matrix printer, business letters,
blacksmithing newsletter, assorted.

Been there, done that... WordStar was mainly intended to be used as a
word processor for writing letters formatted as well as they could be
back at the time when they were written on matrix printers with a fixed
font with up to 80 characters on each line. WordStar automatically added
some spaces to the documents so both the left and right margins became
aligned which made the documents look really impressive back then.

I also used WordStar as an editor for programming Basic on my CP/M
system. Some years later, when I on university were supposed to use emacs
for programming I initially wanted to remap the keys in emacs to the way
they were used in WordStar, but I soon dropped that idea and learned
emacs instead.

Is there an online tutorial PDF for Latex that's simple-minded?

For that quick tutorial purpose I have used
http://www.ddg.lth.se/perf/handledning/handledning.pdf
which has been great for me, but might be less useful for you as it is
written in swedish.

For reference I have used https://icl.utk.edu/~mgates3/docs/latex.pdf but
it is more of a reference document than a tutorial.

Some googling seem to point at some tutorial pages about Latex, but those
are web pages rather than pdf and I can't say how good they are as I
haven't used them myself.

regards Henrik

maus

2023-03-11 11:30:43 UTC

Ha! Until ca. '92 I used -- I forget, was it WordStar? -- a markup word
processor on CP/M with a dot matrix printer, business letters,
blacksmithing newsletter, assorted.

Been there, done that... WordStar was mainly intended to be used as a
word processor for writing letters formatted as well as they could be
back at the time when they were written on matrix printers with a fixed
font with up to 80 characters on each line. WordStar automatically added
some spaces to the documents so both the left and right margins became
aligned which made the documents look really impressive back then.
I also used WordStar as an editor for programming Basic on my CP/M
system. Some years later, when I on university were supposed to use emacs
for programming I initially wanted to remap the keys in emacs to the way
they were used in WordStar, but I soon dropped that idea and learned
emacs instead.

Is there an online tutorial PDF for Latex that's simple-minded?

For that quick tutorial purpose I have used
http://www.ddg.lth.se/perf/handledning/handledning.pdf
which has been great for me, but might be less useful for you as it is
written in swedish.
For reference I have used https://icl.utk.edu/~mgates3/docs/latex.pdf but
it is more of a reference document than a tutorial.
Some googling seem to point at some tutorial pages about Latex, but those
are web pages rather than pdf and I can't say how good they are as I
haven't used them myself.
regards Henrik

Lamport's book on latex is all you will ever need.

A lot of other books are about idiots variations, as when a bad teacher
tells his pupils, "The rest is obvious."

using vim as editor, which can take a little learning.

The sacred words are, "Keep It Simple, Stupid"

I have a laser printer, and I am thinking of reverting to a
dot-matrix. KISS.

--
***@mail.com
where is our money gone, Dude?

Javier

2023-03-12 03:52:06 UTC

Post by maus
Lamport's book on latex is all you will ever need.

It would be good if the books criticized the design of TeX,
but regrettably nobody dares to criticize what they teach to newbies.
One of the issues is that TeX does not come from the UNIX world,
but from TOPS-20, and that makes the design of TeX quite monolythic.
Over the time people have written tools to interact with TeX
and LaTeX in a UNIX-like way.

I would not rely on the default tools latex or pdflatex (which is
what the tutorials tell newbies to do), but instead would use
latexmk (which is part of the official TeXlive distribution).

latexmk makes compiling documents much nicer. I really hate being
thrown into interactive mode each time there is an error in the
document (and when you are a newbie you make a lot of errors).

Also, another way TeX deviates from the UNIX way of doing things is
that there is no independent preprocessor like cpp or ratfor.
People had to write additional tools in perl and python to do
things like substituting macros or include files (latexpand).

Another thing that will piss off somebody from the UNIX world is how
poor the manpage documentation is. There is an info manual.
It does document the language quite well, but does not say much about
the CLI tools. In emacs you should see it with

M-: (info "(latex2e) Top")

Part of the reason for such a poor documention of the CLI tools is
that many users of LaTeX do not use CLI tools but an IDE-like
integrated editor like texworks.

In fact, TeX is not very popular among UNIX programmers, and software
documentation is seldom written in LaTeX (with the exception of people
doing maths and physics).

I began using both LaTeX and UNIX almost at the same time, so I was
not really questioning the design of TeX when I was learning, but the
OP, who has been using UNIX for decades, will be shocked by the design
of the TeX tools.

For the OP, I would think twice before diving into LaTeX. It has many
pitfalls, error reporting is not always clear and takes long time to learn.
If the OP has a simpler way of writing letters, I would put LaTeX aside.

maus

2023-03-12 08:59:46 UTC

Post by maus
Lamport's book on latex is all you will ever need.

I repeat, lamport's book is all you will ever need, standard tools..

Post by Javier
It would be good if the books criticized the design of TeX,
but regrettably nobody dares to criticize what they teach to newbies.
One of the issues is that TeX does not come from the UNIX world,
but from TOPS-20, and that makes the design of TeX quite monolythic.
Over the time people have written tools to interact with TeX
and LaTeX in a UNIX-like way.

There is a lady who used to post on folklore.computers. She admired
TOPS, forget which. BAH. In ways, she was a PITA about it. I have used
Linux since it was first proposed. Main problem is the people who want
to turn into Windows, mostly assholes ("Why should I not work as `root'
is typical.)

I use Latex for letters, which, since I returned from hospital, I seldom
write.

Post by Javier
I would not rely on the default tools latex or pdflatex (which is
what the tutorials tell newbies to do), but instead would use
latexmk which is part of the official TeXlive distribution).

Texlive is bloated. Tex, Latex is all you need.

Post by Javier
latexmk makes compiling documents much nicer. I really hate being
thrown into interactive mode each time there is an error in the
document (and when you are a newbie you make a lot of errors).

Its part of learning. If you never sat on a potty, you will find life
difficult.

Post by Javier
Also, another way TeX deviates from the UNIX way of doing things is
that there is no independent preprocessor like cpp or ratfor.
People had to write additional tools in perl and python to do
things like substituting macros or include files (latexpand).

perl, regrettably, is fading into the path. I use ruby. I find the
problem with python is the versions. Debian has moved to 3.0+

Post by Javier
Another thing that will piss off somebody from the UNIX world is how
poor the manpage documentation is. There is an info manual.
It does document the language quite well, but does not say much about
the CLI tools. In emacs you should see it with
M-: (info "(latex2e) Top")

Mein Gott, someone still uses emacs!

Post by Javier
Part of the reason for such a poor documention of the CLI tools is
that many users of LaTeX do not use CLI tools but an IDE-like
integrated editor like texworks.

those IDE tools are the signs that someone wants to use Windows, but is
ashamed to admit it.

Post by Javier
In fact, TeX is not very popular among UNIX programmers, and software
documentation is seldom written in LaTeX (with the exception of people
doing maths and physics).

I agree. For some purposes, markdown tools are easier. I use
asciidoctor. I still dont know how to enter some things.

Post by Javier
I began using both LaTeX and UNIX almost at the same time, so I was
not really questioning the design of TeX when I was learning, but the
OP, who has been using UNIX for decades, will be shocked by the design
of the TeX tools.
For the OP, I would think twice before diving into LaTeX. It has many
pitfalls, error reporting is not always clear and takes long time to learn.
If the OP has a simpler way of writing letters, I would put LaTeX aside.

the less I use a mouse, the better I like it. When I was in hospital,
a doctor arrived one day to propose an operation to remove a pain in
my right arm. ("Only 1% die during the operation.")

I got home, avoided computer games and the mouse,, and the pain
diappeared.

--
***@mail.com
where is our money gone, Dude?

Henrik Carlqvist

2023-03-12 11:04:07 UTC

Post by Javier
In fact, TeX is not very popular among UNIX programmers, and software
documentation is seldom written in LaTeX (with the exception of people
doing maths and physics).

This is true, if you are only writing some programming documentation like
some design description or a requirement specification most people will
find it easier and more efficient to use som graphical office application
like LibreOffice or MS Word.

But Latex really shines when it comes to describing mathematical formulas
or writing long documents with hundreds or thousands of figures.

However, for a programmer Latex can still be useful for things like
automagically generate different kinds of test reports.

regards Henrik

Javier

2023-03-12 17:10:20 UTC

Post by Javier
In fact, TeX is not very popular among UNIX programmers, and software
documentation is seldom written in LaTeX (with the exception of people
doing maths and physics).

Not all of them where done on graphical office applications. Kernighan's books
are typeset with pic|tbl|eqn|troff -ms (as stated in page iv of K&R).

Post by Henrik Carlqvist
But Latex really shines when it comes to describing mathematical formulas
or writing long documents with hundreds or thousands of figures.

Richard W Stevens books have hundreds of figures, and IIRC they were
typeset with troff. But you are right about the equations. Nothing
is so powerfull for equations as LaTeX.

Javier

2023-03-12 17:48:55 UTC

Post by Javier
Not all of them where done on graphical office applications. Kernighan's books
are typeset with pic|tbl|eqn|troff -ms (as stated in page iv of K&R).

Post by Henrik Carlqvist
But Latex really shines when it comes to describing mathematical formulas
or writing long documents with hundreds or thousands of figures.

Richard W Stevens books have hundreds of figures, and IIRC they were
typeset with troff. But you are right about the equations. Nothing
is so powerfull for equations as LaTeX.

What I want to illustrate, is the fact that the UNIX world didn't
embrace LaTeX, and there is a good reason for that: its implementation
is not simple.

Martin Schöön

2023-03-12 20:42:21 UTC

Post by Javier
In fact, TeX is not very popular among UNIX programmers, and software
documentation is seldom written in LaTeX (with the exception of people
doing maths and physics).

Not all of them where done on graphical office applications. Kernighan's books
are typeset with pic|tbl|eqn|troff -ms (as stated in page iv of K&R).

I guess he had to given his role early UNIX development :-)

/Martin

Javier

2023-03-12 21:17:35 UTC

Post by Martin SchÃ¶Ã¶n

Post by Javier
Not all of them where done on graphical office applications. Kernighan's books
are typeset with pic|tbl|eqn|troff -ms (as stated in page iv of K&R).

I guess he had to given his role early UNIX development :-)

They had to justify their funding to AT&T management :-)

https://nakamotoinstitute.org/static/docs/taoup.pdf

Unix's first real job, in 1971, was to support what would now be called
word processing for the Bell Labs patent department; the first Unix
application was the ancestor of the nroff(1) text formatter. This
project justified the purchase of a PDP-11, a much more capable
minicomputer. Management remained blissfully unaware that the
word-processing system that Thompson and colleagues were building was
incubating an operating system. Operating systems were not in the Bell
Labs plan - AT&T had joined the Multics consortium precisely to avoid
doing an operating system on its own.

Martin Schöön

2023-03-13 20:08:52 UTC

Post by Javier
Not all of them where done on graphical office applications. Kernighan's books
are typeset with pic|tbl|eqn|troff -ms (as stated in page iv of K&R).

I guess he had to given his role in early UNIX development :-)

They had to justify their funding to AT&T management :-)
https://nakamotoinstitute.org/static/docs/taoup.pdf
Unix's first real job, in 1971, was to support what would now be called
word processing for the Bell Labs patent department; the first Unix
application was the ancestor of the nroff(1) text formatter. This
project justified the purchase of a PDP-11, a much more capable
minicomputer. Management remained blissfully unaware that the
word-processing system that Thompson and colleagues were building was
incubating an operating system. Operating systems were not in the Bell
Labs plan - AT&T had joined the Multics consortium precisely to avoid
doing an operating system on its own.

Thanks for the PDF. It is created by pdfTeX14.h so right on topic :-)

Kernighan himself on Computerphile:

/Martin

Jim Diamond

2023-03-14 00:14:19 UTC

Post by Javier
In fact, TeX is not very popular among UNIX programmers, and software
documentation is seldom written in LaTeX (with the exception of people
doing maths and physics).

That presumes they know one of those; not everyone who does software
development was indoctrinated into the M$ tool space. I've seen people use
all sorts of tools to produce documentation. (Sometimes even just ordinary
plain text!)

Jim

Henrik Carlqvist

2023-03-15 06:26:20 UTC

On 2023-03-12 at 08:04 ADT, Henrik Carlqvist

Post by Henrik Carlqvist
This is true, if you are only writing some programming documentation
like some design description or a requirement specification most people
will find it easier and more efficient to use som graphical office
application like LibreOffice or MS Word.

That presumes they know one of those; not everyone who does software
development was indoctrinated into the M$ tool space. I've seen people
use all sorts of tools to produce documentation. (Sometimes even just
ordinary plain text!)

Yes, but the learning curve will not be as steep for a graphical office
application as for Latex. However, once you learn Latex you can use the
same favorite editor for your documentation as you use for programming.

regards Henrik

Jim Diamond

2023-03-20 19:05:38 UTC

On 2023-03-12 at 08:04 ADT, Henrik Carlqvist

That presumes they know one of those; not everyone who does software
development was indoctrinated into the M$ tool space. I've seen people
use all sorts of tools to produce documentation. (Sometimes even just
ordinary plain text!)

Yes, but the learning curve will not be as steep for a graphical office
application as for Latex.

I think that is true to a point. A brand new can bang out a word-processor
document with little help. However, if one wants to learn the "advanced"
features of word processors there will be a non-trivial learning curve
there as well. But it seems a lot of people (that I've seen) never get
much beyond the beginner stage with word processors, and maybe this
(alleged at least by me) learning curve is the reason for it.

Having said that, you can bang out a simple document in plain TeX if you
just know enough to put "\bye" or "\end" at the end. (And you need to know
how to use some text editor, of course.)

Post by Henrik Carlqvist
However, once you learn Latex you can use the same favorite editor for
your documentation as you use for programming.

I agree whole-heartedly. The "editor" in word-processors is one of the
things I really detest about them.

I've never used Lyx, but I wonder how someone who knows nothing about
either word processors or LaTeX, given Lyx, would compare to someone who is
given a word processor to use.

In any case, I still think that the current state of LaTeX is a botch.
Perhaps when LaTeX 3 comes out it won't be such a mess.

Jim

Mike Spencer

2023-03-13 03:54:57 UTC

Post by maus
Lamport's book on latex is all you will ever need.

Tnx for the pointer, saved for reference, but see below.

[snip]
latexmk makes compiling documents much nicer....
[snip]
Another thing that will piss off somebody from the UNIX world is how
poor the manpage documentation is. There is an info manual.
It does document the language quite well, but does not say much about
the CLI tools. In emacs you should see it with
M-: (info "(latex2e) Top")

Gak!

I began using both LaTeX and UNIX almost at the same time, so I was
not really questioning the design of TeX when I was learning, but the
OP...

That would be me.

...who has been using UNIX for decades, will be shocked by the design
of the TeX tools.
For the OP, I would think twice before diving into LaTeX. It has many
pitfalls, error reporting is not always clear and takes long time to learn.
If the OP has a simpler way of writing letters, I would put LaTeX aside.

This is probably the course I'll follow. "Never say never..." but I
have way too many other things to do, most of them more useful and
more interesting, to undertake beating up Latex without a compelling
motive.

Tnx,

--
Mike Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada

Eric Pozharski

2023-03-11 14:27:48 UTC

Post by Mike Spencer

Post by Mike Spencer
I don't have a word processor. On the very rare occasions that I
need to print a business letter, I compose it in simple HTML and
print from the browser.

HTML might work, but if you want really nice letters you should learn
latex!

*SKIP*

Post by Mike Spencer
But when I went to my shiny new Linux system a few years later, it had
Latex or Tetex or something that was a dialect of TEX.

(disclaimer: I'm not that immersed). It's called 'texlive' now.
(caveat:) proper capitalization might be an issue; however I've not
seen fights about it ;)

*SKIP*

'lshort.pdf' really got me going back then. Never looked back.

*CUT*

--
Torvalds' goal for Linux is very simple: World Domination
Stallman's goal for GNU is even simpler: Freedom

Jim Diamond

2023-03-14 00:21:34 UTC

Post by Mike Spencer

Post by Mike Spencer
I don't have a word processor. On the very rare occasions that I
need to print a business letter, I compose it in simple HTML and print
from the browser.

HTML might work, but if you want really nice letters you should learn
latex!

But when I went to my shiny new Linux system a few years later, it had
Latex or Tetex or something that was a dialect of TEX. I bumbled
about a bit but never found a tutorial that was simple enough to just,
yew kno, bang out a nice page. All seemed too much like learning a
new programming language (yeah, I know what a macro is but...) to
become a pro compositor.

I find LaTeX to be the ultimate poorly-designed system. It attempts to be
all things to all people, and then falls over its own feet trying to do
that. Because of all the "helpful" packages people have contributed over
time, situations where package A conflicts with package B show up with
disturbing regularity.

(plain) TeX gets a lot of hate from LaTeX people, but if all you want to do
is to bang out a nice page, you may find plain TeX easier to use. By
itself it is pretty low-level, and without writing your own macros you
would end up explicitly changing fonts, explicitly specifying when text is
to be centered, and so on. But if you accept that, the learning curve is
pretty short. If this is of any interest to you, feel free to contact me
directly (that's my real email addr above!) and I might be able to get you
going with plain TeX very quickly. For, at least, banging out one-page
documents.

Cheers.
Jim

John Forkosh

2023-02-21 07:56:37 UTC

Post by Mike Spencer
Now venturing to migrate from lprng to CUPS.
Before I've even read how to start, there seems to be something I
don't understand about inetd and LAN networking.
WHERE DO I BEGIN?
The easiest way to start is by using the web interface to
configure your printer. Go to "http://localhost:631" and choose
the Administration tab at the top of the page.
Okay, but I want to access that (on enoch, the new 15 install box)
from bogus, my current 14.2 main machine. Try http://enoch:631.
The connection was refused when attempting to contact enoch:631
I haven't started ip_tables yet so no firewall.
enoch% pgrep cupsd
1055
I've tried changing /etc/cups/cupsd.conf and /etc/inetd.conf in
various ways (and restarting inetd or cupsd after any change) with no
improvements.
# Only listen for connections from the local machine.
Listen localhost:631
Listen /var/run/cups/cups.sock
# mds -- Also listen for conns from bogus;
Listen 192.168.0.15:631
Using any of ip address (above), hostname (bogus) or * gives same
non-result. Moreover, the cupsd.conf directive to listen doesn't show
enoch-root$ lsof -i:631 -sTCP:LISTEN
COMMAND PID USER FD TYPE DEVICE SIZE/OFF NODE NAME
cupsd 1055 root 5u IPv6 32275 0t0 TCP localhost:ipp (LISTEN)
cupsd 1055 root 6u IPv4 32276 0t0 TCP localhost:ipp (LISTEN)
ipp stream tcp nowait root /usr/sbin/tcpd /usr/sbin/cupsd
doesn't make any difference.
It seems I'm trying to do something that can't be done. Or that needs
a magic incantation I don't know about. Can I access cupsd:631 on
enoch from bogus over the LAN? Or not?
TIA for any help.

Can't offer any explicit advice, but what kind of printer do you have???
I have several Brother printer models, and the brother homepage has
linux install scripts for all of them that work flawlessly with cups.
Just make sure /etc/rc.d/rc.cups has start'ed, turn on your printer
and make sure it's connected (presumably by wifi nowadays), and then
run the script. The necessary /etc/cups/, /usr/share/cups/, etc gets
automatically edited as needed, and the printers "just work" afterwards.
Not sure what similar linux install scripts other printer manufacturers
provide. But I'd suggest googling around for that first.

--
John Forkosh ( mailto: ***@f.com where j=john and f=forkosh )

Marco Moock

2023-02-21 13:47:09 UTC

Post by Mike Spencer
I gave up on postfix and reverted with complete success to sendmail.

:-)

Post by Mike Spencer
# Only listen for connections from the local machine.
Listen localhost:631
Listen /var/run/cups/cups.sock
# mds -- Also listen for conns from bogus;
Listen 192.168.0.15:631
Using any of ip address (above), hostname (bogus) or * gives same
non-result. Moreover, the cupsd.conf directive to listen doesn't show
enoch-root$ lsof -i:631 -sTCP:LISTEN
COMMAND PID USER FD TYPE DEVICE SIZE/OFF NODE NAME
cupsd 1055 root 5u IPv6 32275 0t0 TCP localhost:ipp
(LISTEN) cupsd 1055 root 6u IPv4 32276 0t0 TCP
localhost:ipp (LISTEN)
ipp stream tcp nowait root /usr/sbin/tcpd /usr/sbin/cupsd
doesn't make any difference.

Use either cups itself OR inetd - not both at the same time.

I recommend using CUPS directly if possible.
Please configure and restart the service and run "ss -lutn"

Javier

2023-02-21 21:29:04 UTC

Post by Mike Spencer
I gave up on postfix and reverted with complete success to sendmail.

:-)

I wonder whether the OP wants to run a mail server himself or he
relies on an external SMTP server. Running an mailserver nowadays is
not so easy nowadays, as many mailservers (especially those controlled
by MS like Yahoo or corporate Exchange servers) will drop the received
messages without warning for the silliest reason.

If he relies on an external SMTP server an userland based solution like
ssmtp should be easier

Mike Spencer

2023-02-21 23:50:52 UTC

Post by Mike Spencer
I gave up on postfix and reverted with complete success to sendmail.

:-)

No, no, I don't want to run a mail server.

Just nattering, for the record, if anyone is interested...

I only need three things from sendmail:

1. Hand outgoing mail to a smarthost that requires AUTH (the
deafult)

2. Occasionally hand outgoing mail to a different smarthost that
doesn't require AUTH.

3. Deliver mail from the kernel to root to a mailbox on localhost.

I get 1. & 2. by having 2 sets of files for /etc/mail/*, one
configured for 1., the other configured for 2. If the the server for
1. is down, I can swap those files and restart sendmail.

3. seems to happen automatically without my having to do anything.

Setting up smarthosting, long ago, was so easy that I just manually
edited sendmail.cf before I knew you weren't supposed to do that.
Enabling AUTH was harder but I had earlier invested in the great, fat
O'Reilly Bat Book and could figure it out, use m4.

So sendmail is a Winnebago with all the dealer options, a Zodiac on
the roof, dirt bike strapped to the back and a 2-door Hyundai in tow.
And the config is written in cuneiform that you need a Rosetta stone
(m4) to deal with it.

Postfix is supposed to be better and easier. My take is that it's
also A Winnebago, but without the dealer options or Zodiac. To
stretch the metaphor, the config is written in Chaucerian English so
you only need hours of study, not a Rosetta stone, to sort out and
disable all the details and features meant for a full-on SMTP server
and get just the simple behavior above.

Worse, documentation is in numerous files. And there's no Bat Book.

Post by Javier
If he relies on an external SMTP server an userland based solution like
ssmtp should be easier

Maybe. More bother? Sendmail is doing what I want in 15.0.

(Back to my problem with CUPS later, in another post.)

--
Mike Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada

Grant Taylor

2023-02-22 04:27:04 UTC

1. Hand outgoing mail to a smarthost that requires AUTH (the deafult)

This may become more of a problem as more and more providers are
disabling traditional authentication methods, including SMTP Auth that
you're talking about, in favor of OAUTH.

I'm not aware of any MTA supporting this on smart hosts. Perhaps they
do and I'm just ignorant of it.

--
Grant. . . .
unix || die

Javier

2023-02-21 21:19:45 UTC

man cupsd.conf

From cupsd.conf(5):

The Listen directive is similar to the Port directive but
allows you to restrict access to specific interfaces or networks.

So I would use the Port directive instead, and delete all the Listen directives.

Port 631

Giovanni

2023-02-22 11:59:23 UTC

Post by Mike Spencer
It seems I'm trying to do something that can't be done. Or that needs
a magic incantation I don't know about. Can I access cupsd:631 on
enoch from bogus over the LAN? Or not?

Yes, you can, although if you do not have a browser that runs on enoch
it may be a nightmare.

Best way is to start http://localhost:631 on enoch and follow the
instructions to configure the printer leaving as required step to check
'Allow remote administration' and 'Share printers connected to this
system' on the main 'Administration' page. After that the printer will
be 'http://enoch:631/' from any machine on LAN.

I have a server without X services (it does non even have a display,
only ssh access). With older versions of cups I could use lynx but now
cups uses java scripts and the only method is the command line interface
and a few tweaks to the configuration file to insert the the server name.

If you cannot use a browser you need to use same method using command
line interface. Involved are 'lpadmin' and 'lpoptions' and their
options. Remember that encryption does not work in latest version (at
least on my machines).

## Create default printer
lpadmin -p ml1210 -v "http://milena.home.net.it:631/printers/raw" -D
"Samsung ML-1210 Laser Printer" -L "Local at MONICA" -P
"/etc/cups/Samsung-ML-1210-gdi.ppd"
lpadmin -p ml1210 -o printer-is-shared=false
lpadmin -d ml1210

## Set as user default
lpoptions -d ml1210
lpoptions -p ml1210 -o media=A4

This is an example to create a printer 'ml1210' that prints to a remote
queue 'raw' a pass-thru queue accessible from LAN. You have to modify
the arguments to your needs

Ciao
Giovanni

--
A computer is like an air conditioner,
it stops working when you open Windows.
< https://giovanni.homelinux.net/ >

Peter 'Shaggy' Haywood

2023-02-22 02:00:14 UTC