Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #172805 > unrolled thread

Canon printer minor quibble

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  Canon printer minor quibble Mark Fletcher <mark27q1@gmail.com> - 2016-09-26 17:00 +0200
    Re: Canon printer minor quibble Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-09-26 18:20 +0200
      Re: Canon printer minor quibble deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2016-09-26 19:20 +0200
        Re: Canon printer minor quibble Mark Fletcher <mark27q1@gmail.com> - 2016-09-27 01:20 +0200
      Re: Canon printer minor quibble Mark Fletcher <mark27q1@gmail.com> - 2016-09-27 01:10 +0200
        Re: Canon printer minor quibble Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-09-28 00:00 +0200
          Re: Canon printer minor quibble Mark Fletcher <mark27q1@gmail.com> - 2016-09-28 00:50 +0200
            Re: Canon printer minor quibble Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-09-28 12:30 +0200
              Re: Canon printer minor quibble Mark Fletcher <mark27q1@gmail.com> - 2016-09-29 17:10 +0200
                Re: Canon printer minor quibble Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-09-29 19:10 +0200
                  Re: Canon printer minor quibble Mark Fletcher <mark27q1@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 15:40 +0200
                    Re: Canon printer minor quibble Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-09-30 19:20 +0200
                      Re: Canon printer minor quibble Mark Fletcher <mark27q1@gmail.com> - 2016-10-01 01:40 +0200
                        Re: Canon printer minor quibble Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-10-01 15:30 +0200
                          Re: Canon printer minor quibble Mark Fletcher <mark27q1@gmail.com> - 2016-10-01 16:10 +0200
                            Re: Canon printer minor quibble Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-10-01 16:40 +0200
                Re: Canon printer minor quibble Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-09-29 23:40 +0200
                  Re: Canon printer minor quibble Mark Fletcher <mark27q1@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 14:00 +0200
                    Re: Canon printer minor quibble Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-09-30 14:40 +0200
                      Re: Canon printer minor quibble Mark Fletcher <mark27q1@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 15:10 +0200
                        Re: Canon printer minor quibble Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 15:30 +0200
                          Re: Canon printer minor quibble Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2016-09-30 15:30 +0200
                            Re: Canon printer minor quibble Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-09-30 16:10 +0200
                          Re: Canon printer minor quibble Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-09-30 16:00 +0200
                            Re: Canon printer minor quibble Frank <zuiderduin@gmx.com> - 2016-09-30 16:30 +0200
                              Re: Canon printer minor quibble Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-09-30 16:40 +0200
                                Re: Canon printer minor quibble Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2016-09-30 16:50 +0200
                                  Re: Canon printer minor quibble Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-09-30 17:10 +0200
                                  Re: Canon printer minor quibble rhkramer@gmail.com - 2016-09-30 17:20 +0200
                                    Re: Canon printer minor quibble John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2016-09-30 17:30 +0200
                                    Re: Canon printer minor quibble Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-09-30 20:30 +0200
                                      Re: Canon printer minor quibble Charlie <ariestao1@ipstarmail.com.au> - 2016-09-30 23:50 +0200
                                      Re: Canon printer minor quibble Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-10-01 00:50 +0200
                                        Re: Canon printer minor quibble Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-10-01 21:50 +0200
                                          Re: Canon printer minor quibble Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-10-02 01:00 +0200
                            Re: Canon printer minor quibble Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 16:30 +0200
                              Re: Canon printer minor quibble Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-09-30 17:00 +0200
                                Re: Canon printer minor quibble Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2016-09-30 17:10 +0200
                                  Re: Canon printer minor quibble John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2016-09-30 17:30 +0200
                                    Re: Canon printer minor quibble Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-09-30 17:40 +0200
                                  Re: Canon printer minor quibble Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-09-30 17:40 +0200
                                Re: Canon printer minor quibble Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 17:20 +0200
                                  Re: Canon printer minor quibble Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 17:40 +0200
                                    Re: Canon printer minor quibble Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2016-09-30 20:00 +0200
                                  Re: Canon printer minor quibble Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-09-30 19:10 +0200
                        Re: Canon printer minor quibble Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-09-30 15:50 +0200
                          Re: Canon printer minor quibble David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2016-09-30 23:00 +0200
                            Re: Canon printer minor quibble Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2016-09-30 23:10 +0200
                              Re: Canon printer minor quibble Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-09-30 23:50 +0200
                                Re: Canon printer minor quibble David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2016-10-01 07:50 +0200
                                  Re: Canon printer minor quibble Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-10-01 10:40 +0200
                                    Re: Canon printer minor quibble Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2016-10-01 12:20 +0200
                                  Re: Canon printer minor quibble Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2016-10-01 12:10 +0200
                                    Re: Canon printer minor quibble Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-10-01 21:00 +0200
                          Re: Canon printer minor quibble David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2016-10-05 22:20 +0200
                            Re: Canon printer minor quibble Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-10-06 01:30 +0200

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

#172990

On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 11:00:13 -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 03:51:27PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> > The People
> > can continue to say what they want but it does not change the fact that
> > the official name of the software is CUPS.
> 
> Yes, that is the new Official Name.

Good. Glad we sorted that out.

> Nobody(*) gives a flying leap what the Official Name is.  The question was
> what CUPS stands for.  It stands for Common Unix (or UNIX) Printing System.

Nobody reading the official documentation or source code would find
anything which says what CUPS stands for.
 
> (*) Except lawyers, and you.

I wouldn't want to disrespect the work of the KDE folk by calling their
software the "K Desktop Environment". That's all apart from it being
inaccurate.

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#172983

	Hi.

On Fri, 30 Sep 2016 15:51:27 +0100
Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> wrote:

> On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 15:28:01 +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> 
> > On Friday 30 September 2016 14:55:07 Brian wrote:
> > > It does indeed say this. The "C" is not equated anywhere with "Common".
> > 
> > No.  That is why I said "most of it", not "all of it".
> 
> It isn't *any* of it.
> 
> > If we are talking about British Institutions ...  Do you even remember 
> > Consignia???  Did you even for one moment stop calling it the Post Office?  
> > Lawyers are one thing.  What people are prepared to say another.  I certainly 
> > never heard anyone say "I'm popping down to Consignia to post a letter".
> > 
> > In that case, the people won of course.  Consignia is dead, the Post Office 
> > lives.
> > 
> > CUPS was intended as Common Unix Printing System.  UNIX is a trademark so 
> > Apple couldn't use it.  So, unlike for the name Apple itself, where Mac lied 
> > to the court and seems to have got away with it,  Apple obediently stopped 
> > using the name and called it officially CUPS.  We, the people, continue to 
> > say Common Unix Printing System.
> 
> ESP called it the "Common Unix Printing System". Apple doesn't. Why
> should the wishes (and rights) of one company be respected but not those
> of another?
> 
> Apple has probably trademarked "Common Unix Printing System". The People
> can continue to say what they want but it does not change the fact that
> the official name of the software is CUPS. That is what Debian uses.

CUPS package description says "The Common UNIX Printing System (or CUPS
(tm))" for me. So Debian Project uses "Common UNIX Printing System" as
well.

Reco

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#172988

On Friday 30 September 2016 16:12:59 Reco wrote:
> 	Hi.
>
> On Fri, 30 Sep 2016 15:51:27 +0100
>
> Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> wrote:
> > On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 15:28:01 +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > > On Friday 30 September 2016 14:55:07 Brian wrote:
> > > > It does indeed say this. The "C" is not equated anywhere with
> > > > "Common".
> > >
> > > No.  That is why I said "most of it", not "all of it".
> >
> > It isn't *any* of it.
> >
> > > If we are talking about British Institutions ...  Do you even remember
> > > Consignia???  Did you even for one moment stop calling it the Post
> > > Office? Lawyers are one thing.  What people are prepared to say
> > > another.  I certainly never heard anyone say "I'm popping down to
> > > Consignia to post a letter".
> > >
> > > In that case, the people won of course.  Consignia is dead, the Post
> > > Office lives.
> > >
> > > CUPS was intended as Common Unix Printing System.  UNIX is a trademark
> > > so Apple couldn't use it.  So, unlike for the name Apple itself, where
> > > Mac lied to the court and seems to have got away with it,  Apple
> > > obediently stopped using the name and called it officially CUPS.  We,
> > > the people, continue to say Common Unix Printing System.
> >
> > ESP called it the "Common Unix Printing System". Apple doesn't. Why
> > should the wishes (and rights) of one company be respected but not those
> > of another?
> >
> > Apple has probably trademarked "Common Unix Printing System". The People
> > can continue to say what they want but it does not change the fact that
> > the official name of the software is CUPS. That is what Debian uses.
>
> CUPS package description says "The Common UNIX Printing System (or CUPS
> (tm))" for me. So Debian Project uses "Common UNIX Printing System" as
> well.

Thanks, Reco!  Hadn't thought of that. :
"lisi@Eros:~$ aptitude show CUPS
Package: cups
State: installed
Automatically installed: yes
[snip]
Maintainer: Debian Printing Team <debian-printing@lists.debian.org>
[snip]
*****Description: Common UNIX Printing System(tm)***** - PPD/driver support, 
web interface
***** The Common UNIX Printing System***** (or CUPS(tm)) is a printing system 
etc."

The stars are mine.  It does indeed seem to call it Common UNIX Printing 
System!!!  Twice!!!

Lisi

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#172994

On Friday 30 September 2016 11:37:13 Lisi Reisz wrote:

> On Friday 30 September 2016 16:12:59 Reco wrote:
> > 	Hi.
> >
> > On Fri, 30 Sep 2016 15:51:27 +0100
> >
> > Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> wrote:
> > > On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 15:28:01 +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > > > On Friday 30 September 2016 14:55:07 Brian wrote:
> > > > > It does indeed say this. The "C" is not equated anywhere with
> > > > > "Common".
> > > >
> > > > No.  That is why I said "most of it", not "all of it".
> > >
> > > It isn't *any* of it.
> > >
> > > > If we are talking about British Institutions ...  Do you even
> > > > remember Consignia???  Did you even for one moment stop calling
> > > > it the Post Office? Lawyers are one thing.  What people are
> > > > prepared to say another.  I certainly never heard anyone say
> > > > "I'm popping down to Consignia to post a letter".
> > > >
> > > > In that case, the people won of course.  Consignia is dead, the
> > > > Post Office lives.
> > > >
> > > > CUPS was intended as Common Unix Printing System.  UNIX is a
> > > > trademark so Apple couldn't use it.  So, unlike for the name
> > > > Apple itself, where Mac lied to the court and seems to have got
> > > > away with it,  Apple obediently stopped using the name and
> > > > called it officially CUPS.  We, the people, continue to say
> > > > Common Unix Printing System.
> > >
> > > ESP called it the "Common Unix Printing System". Apple doesn't.
> > > Why should the wishes (and rights) of one company be respected but
> > > not those of another?
> > >
> > > Apple has probably trademarked "Common Unix Printing System". The
> > > People can continue to say what they want but it does not change
> > > the fact that the official name of the software is CUPS. That is
> > > what Debian uses.
> >
> > CUPS package description says "The Common UNIX Printing System (or
> > CUPS (tm))" for me. So Debian Project uses "Common UNIX Printing
> > System" as well.
>
> Thanks, Reco!  Hadn't thought of that. :
> "lisi@Eros:~$ aptitude show CUPS
> Package: cups
> State: installed
> Automatically installed: yes
> [snip]
> Maintainer: Debian Printing Team <debian-printing@lists.debian.org>
> [snip]
> *****Description: Common UNIX Printing System(tm)***** - PPD/driver
> support, web interface
> ***** The Common UNIX Printing System***** (or CUPS(tm)) is a printing
> system etc."
>
> The stars are mine.  It does indeed seem to call it Common UNIX
> Printing System!!!  Twice!!!
>
> Lisi

When Mike Sweet started the CUPS project, there was not much printing 
support for linux.  There was lp, lpd to drive the lot but the details 
to drive the printers of the day were in the every man for himself 
category. My first linux install, Red Hat 5.0 in 1997 didn't have a clue 
how to drive the 24 pin OKI I was bringing over from an Amiga.

Mike, fresh out of school at the time, saw printing's poor support on 
linux as an opportunity to collect it all under one name.

IIRC CUPS was first available in 1999 or 2000.  And its gotten pretty 
good over the next 16 or 17 years.

I've known Mike longer than that, from back in the Delphi days in 1987 or 
so, he wrote several things for the CoCo (TRS-80 Color Computer's, a 
family of machines based on the motorola 6809)  that having gotten a 
passing grade from his comp sci prof, he published.  I did some fine 
tuning of a couple of them, gaining some speed in the process.  With his 
permission of course.

He has done well, selling CUPS to Apple several years ago while still 
keeping it all GPL. I wondered about that at the time, but its all come 
out quite well for all since.  Generally, if a makers printer is not in 
cups, its because the makers drivers are proprietary.  Those makers 
products rarely get any my fingerprints on them at the store when I need 
a fresh printer.

Some makers, Brother to name one, have linux drivers available for their 
stuff on their web pages, that work well with cups. I am useing Brothers 
drivers on this wheezy install to run one of their bigger MFC's, a 
printer/adf-scanner combo that can handle 11x17 inch paper. Not too 
handily, but it will do it.

Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#172992

On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 18:12:59 +0300, Reco wrote:

> On Fri, 30 Sep 2016 15:51:27 +0100
> Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> > ESP called it the "Common Unix Printing System". Apple doesn't. Why
> > should the wishes (and rights) of one company be respected but not those
> > of another?
> > 
> > Apple has probably trademarked "Common Unix Printing System". The People
> > can continue to say what they want but it does not change the fact that
> > the official name of the software is CUPS. That is what Debian uses.
> 
> CUPS package description says "The Common UNIX Printing System (or CUPS
> (tm))" for me. So Debian Project uses "Common UNIX Printing System" as
> well.

Thanks for pointing that out. The package description hasn't altered in
that respect since the early days when Debian packaged ESP CUPS. The
equating of "Common UNIX Printing System" and "CUPS" would have fitted
in well with how ESP described it. The description still uses both terms
(and acknowledges the trademarks) and still equates them even though the
present upstream does not 

Does this remnant from the pre-2007 days say something about Debian's
view or not? It might say something about Debian but it definitely says
nothing about the upstream developers' view. As I've said, "Common UNIX
Printing System" as an alternatve to CUPS is conspicuously absent from
all source code and official documentation.

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#172969

On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 22:02:05 +0900, Mark Fletcher wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 01:31:03PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> > On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 20:54:32 +0900, Mark Fletcher wrote:
> > 
> > > On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 10:31:45PM +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > > > On Thursday 29 September 2016 16:03:38 Mark Fletcher wrote:
> > > > > which I find ironic
> > > > > considering what the U of CUPS stands for
> > > > 
> > > > Why?  MacOSX is Unix based (via BSD) and CUPS is supposed to be common to all 
> > > > Unices (though I have only used it on Linux and MacOSX).
> > > > 
> > > Precisely, Lisi. Precisely.
> > 
> > The "U" in CUPS officially doesn't stand for anything. The same applies
> > to the "C", "P" and "S".
> > 
> According to whom, Brian? (Apart from you, obviously :) ). According to 
> the Internet (so it _must_ be true) it stands for Common Unix Printing 
> System. Are they, and the Gutenprint driver which prints that on its 
> test pages, just making sh*t up then? (To be fair I don't know which 
> component creates the test page, but I do know, because I am sitting 
> here with one about an inch away from my left hand, that when you ask 
> CUPS to print a test page, it prints that on the test page.)

I take it you are talking about the Debian PrinterTestPage (the logo is
at the left hand side). Nowhere on that page does it say "Common Unix
Printing System". Even if it did say that this is a Debian document, not an
official upstream CUPS document. It wouldn't count.

The Internet might want CUPS to mean "Common Unix Printing System"; it
could organise a day of protest demanding CUPS to mean "Common Unix
Printing System"; it could sell tee shirts saying "CUPS - the Common
Unix Printing System". That doesn't count either.

Find any significant occurance of "Common Unix Printing System" in the
official CUPS documentation or in its source code and there would be a
case to answer. There isn't, so there isn't. :)

The official name of the software is CUPS.

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#173001

On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 14:40:44 (+0100), Brian wrote:

> The Internet might want CUPS to mean "Common Unix Printing System"; it
> could organise a day of protest demanding CUPS to mean "Common Unix
> Printing System"; it could sell tee shirts saying "CUPS - the Common
> Unix Printing System". That doesn't count either.
> 
> Find any significant occurance of "Common Unix Printing System" in the
> official CUPS documentation or in its source code and there would be a
> case to answer. There isn't, so there isn't. :)
> 
> The official name of the software is CUPS.

It would be very surprising to find any occurrence of the string
"Common UNIX Printing System" in CUPS even though that is the
derivation of the term CUPS and, I assume, was still current when
Apple bought it some time in 2007. After all, the home page says:

"CUPS

"CUPS is the standards-based, open source printing system developed by
Apple Inc. for macOS® and other UNIX®-like operating systems."

which is stretching the truth IMHO, given the normal meaning of "for",
"and", and "other", written in that order. Calling it "Common UNIX
Printing System" would blow that out of the water.

They have not air-brushed the original name out of history however.
The blog on their official web pages still documents the (apparently)
last version that carried that name: "Common UNIX Printing System 1.4b2"
15 Dec 2008, and all previous releases use the two names arbitrarily.

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#173002

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 03:49:23PM -0500, David Wright wrote:
> "CUPS is the standards-based, open source printing system developed by
> Apple Inc. for macOS® and other UNIX®-like operating systems."
> 
> which is stretching the truth IMHO, given the normal meaning of "for",
> "and", and "other", written in that order. Calling it "Common UNIX
> Printing System" would blow that out of the water.

Their use of "developed by" is rather jaw-dropping as well.  Perhaps
they mean it in the sense of "maintained by", but I think most people
would read it as "created by" which is blatantly untrue.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#173004

On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 17:00:02 -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 03:49:23PM -0500, David Wright wrote:
> > "CUPS is the standards-based, open source printing system developed by
> > Apple Inc. for macOS® and other UNIX®-like operating systems."
> > 
> > which is stretching the truth IMHO, given the normal meaning of "for",
> > "and", and "other", written in that order. Calling it "Common UNIX
> > Printing System" would blow that out of the water.
> 
> Their use of "developed by" is rather jaw-dropping as well.  Perhaps
> they mean it in the sense of "maintained by", but I think most people

No, they mean "developed by...".

> would read it as "created by" which is blatantly untrue.

Most people have an understanding of language (which you appear to lack)
and would read it as "developed by...".

- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#173010

On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 22:48:38 (+0100), Brian wrote:
> On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 17:00:02 -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 03:49:23PM -0500, David Wright wrote:
> > > "CUPS is the standards-based, open source printing system developed by
> > > Apple Inc. for macOS® and other UNIX®-like operating systems."
> > > 
> > > which is stretching the truth IMHO, given the normal meaning of "for",
> > > "and", and "other", written in that order. Calling it "Common UNIX
> > > Printing System" would blow that out of the water.
> > 
> > Their use of "developed by" is rather jaw-dropping as well.  Perhaps
> > they mean it in the sense of "maintained by", but I think most people
> 
> No, they mean "developed by...".
> 
> > would read it as "created by" which is blatantly untrue.
> 
> Most people have an understanding of language (which you appear to lack)
> and would read it as "developed by...".

I think that was rude and uncalled for.

The clever thing about the web page is the careful omission of a comma
after system, so that the sentence gets read as

C is the S   that is   developed by A

rather than

C is the S,   which was   developed by A.

My observation is that most computer software websites credit the
original authors/creators/developers in a place easily found by
casual visitors. I haven't found any mention of Sweet outside the
blog, and only a mere two occurrences there.

Going back to your point about the logo, it's very odd that although
"CUPS, the CUPS logo, and macOS are trademarks of Apple Inc.",
http://www.apple.com/legal/intellectual-property/trademark/appletmlist.html
makes no mention of CUPS or its logo, and I would appreciate anyone
pointing out an example on the CUPS website. Its absence may be
because Apple don't like putting it on the web as it has "UNIX"
prominently displayed. The only legible occurrence I can see on my
screen is the big one on the CUPS homepage. The logo that sits on
every page appears to be deliberately fuzzy.

As for the meaning of "develop", you seem to have been influenced by
that fatuous sentence "Brexit means Brexit"! In the normal world,
one of the meanings of "develop" is "create". For example,

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/develop

 transitive verb

 2 b : to create or produce especially by deliberate effort over time
       <develop new ways of doing business> <develop software>

Is this an unusual meaning in the context of computer software?
Let's look at some great software creations and how they are reported:

http://www.tex.ac.uk/FAQ-whatTeX.html
"Knuth developed the first version of TeX in 1978 to deal with ..."

https://www.fsf.org/news/richard-stallman-inducted-into-the-2013-internet-hall-of-fame
"Stallman developed a number of widely used software components of GNU ..."

http://www.few.vu.nl/en/news-events/news-archive/2016/jan-mrt/30th-anniversary-andrew-tanenbaums-minix.aspx
"Emeritus professor Andrew Tanenbaum developed this operating system while ..."

http://sunsite.uakom.sk/sunworldonline/swol-05-1998/swol-05-perl.html
"Larry Wall developed Perl in 1987 to simplify administrative reporting ..."

http://www.gocertify.com/articles/python-is-the-holy-grail-so-to-speak-of-programming-languages.html
"Ultimately Rossum developed a language and interpreter that immediately ..."

http://memim.com/lame.html
"... Mike Cheng developed a patch for an example implementation of an MP3 encoder"

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#173012

On Sat 01 Oct 2016 at 00:39:35 -0500, David Wright wrote:

> On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 22:48:38 (+0100), Brian wrote:
> > On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 17:00:02 -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> > 
> > > On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 03:49:23PM -0500, David Wright wrote:
> > > > "CUPS is the standards-based, open source printing system developed by
> > > > Apple Inc. for macOS® and other UNIX®-like operating systems."
> > > > 
> > > > which is stretching the truth IMHO, given the normal meaning of "for",
> > > > "and", and "other", written in that order. Calling it "Common UNIX
> > > > Printing System" would blow that out of the water.
> > > 
> > > Their use of "developed by" is rather jaw-dropping as well.  Perhaps
> > > they mean it in the sense of "maintained by", but I think most people
> > 
> > No, they mean "developed by...".
> > 
> > > would read it as "created by" which is blatantly untrue.
> > 
> > Most people have an understanding of language (which you appear to lack)
> > and would read it as "developed by...".
> 
> I think that was rude and uncalled for.

And crediting someone with indulging in doublespeak, being a lawyer and
deserving pity isn't?

> The clever thing about the web page is the careful omission of a comma
> after system, so that the sentence gets read as
> 
> C is the S   that is   developed by A
> 
> rather than
> 
> C is the S,   which was   developed by A.
> 
> My observation is that most computer software websites credit the
> original authors/creators/developers in a place easily found by
> casual visitors. I haven't found any mention of Sweet outside the
> blog, and only a mere two occurrences there.

CUPS 2.2.0 was released on 13 Sep 2016. It was developed by Apple. CUPS
2.2.x will be developed by Apple and released soonish. CUPS 1.6.x, CUPS
1.7.x and CUPS 2.0.x were developed by Apple. Apple is the only entity
developing CUPS. "C is the S that is developed by A" looks an accurate
reflection of the state of affairs.

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#173019

On Saturday 01 October 2016 04:32:31 Brian wrote:

> On Sat 01 Oct 2016 at 00:39:35 -0500, David Wright wrote:
> > On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 22:48:38 (+0100), Brian wrote:
> > > On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 17:00:02 -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 03:49:23PM -0500, David Wright wrote:
> > > > > "CUPS is the standards-based, open source printing system
> > > > > developed by Apple Inc. for macOS® and other UNIX®-like
> > > > > operating systems."
> > > > >
> > > > > which is stretching the truth IMHO, given the normal meaning
> > > > > of "for", "and", and "other", written in that order. Calling
> > > > > it "Common UNIX Printing System" would blow that out of the
> > > > > water.
> > > >
> > > > Their use of "developed by" is rather jaw-dropping as well. 
> > > > Perhaps they mean it in the sense of "maintained by", but I
> > > > think most people
> > >
> > > No, they mean "developed by...".
> > >
> > > > would read it as "created by" which is blatantly untrue.
> > >
> > > Most people have an understanding of language (which you appear to
> > > lack) and would read it as "developed by...".
> >
> > I think that was rude and uncalled for.
>
> And crediting someone with indulging in doublespeak, being a lawyer
> and deserving pity isn't?
>
> > The clever thing about the web page is the careful omission of a
> > comma after system, so that the sentence gets read as
> >
> > C is the S   that is   developed by A
> >
> > rather than
> >
> > C is the S,   which was   developed by A.
> >
> > My observation is that most computer software websites credit the
> > original authors/creators/developers in a place easily found by
> > casual visitors. I haven't found any mention of Sweet outside the
> > blog, and only a mere two occurrences there.
>
> CUPS 2.2.0 was released on 13 Sep 2016. It was developed by Apple.
> CUPS 2.2.x will be developed by Apple and released soonish. CUPS
> 1.6.x, CUPS 1.7.x and CUPS 2.0.x were developed by Apple. Apple is the
> only entity developing CUPS. "C is the S that is developed by A" looks
> an accurate reflection of the state of affairs.

The last msg I have from the cups@cups.org mailing list is in may of 
2016, and is signed by:
Michael Sweet, Senior Printing System Engineer

Its possible I am not getting that list since moving my mail server usage 
to shentel.net, I had to call their support and have ALL my mailing list 
subscriptions whitelisted, and I may have failed to specify 
cups@cups.org as a good address to allow through. Humm, its acting like 
a new subscription request. So we'll see if it works.

Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#173017

On Saturday 01 October 2016 01:39:35 David Wright wrote:

> On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 22:48:38 (+0100), Brian wrote:
> > On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 17:00:02 -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> > > On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 03:49:23PM -0500, David Wright wrote:
> > > > "CUPS is the standards-based, open source printing system
> > > > developed by Apple Inc. for macOS® and other UNIX®-like
> > > > operating systems."
> > > >
> > > > which is stretching the truth IMHO, given the normal meaning of
> > > > "for", "and", and "other", written in that order. Calling it
> > > > "Common UNIX Printing System" would blow that out of the water.
> > >
> > > Their use of "developed by" is rather jaw-dropping as well. 
> > > Perhaps they mean it in the sense of "maintained by", but I think
> > > most people
> >
> > No, they mean "developed by...".
> >
> > > would read it as "created by" which is blatantly untrue.
> >
> > Most people have an understanding of language (which you appear to
> > lack) and would read it as "developed by...".
>
> I think that was rude and uncalled for.
>
> The clever thing about the web page is the careful omission of a comma
> after system, so that the sentence gets read as
>
> C is the S   that is   developed by A
>
> rather than
>
> C is the S,   which was   developed by A.
>
> My observation is that most computer software websites credit the
> original authors/creators/developers in a place easily found by
> casual visitors. I haven't found any mention of Sweet outside the
> blog, and only a mere two occurrences there.
>
> Going back to your point about the logo, it's very odd that although
> "CUPS, the CUPS logo, and macOS are trademarks of Apple Inc.",
> http://www.apple.com/legal/intellectual-property/trademark/appletmlist
>.html makes no mention of CUPS or its logo, and I would appreciate
> anyone pointing out an example on the CUPS website. Its absence may be
> because Apple don't like putting it on the web as it has "UNIX"
> prominently displayed. The only legible occurrence I can see on my
> screen is the big one on the CUPS homepage. The logo that sits on
> every page appears to be deliberately fuzzy.
>
> As for the meaning of "develop", you seem to have been influenced by
> that fatuous sentence "Brexit means Brexit"! In the normal world,
> one of the meanings of "develop" is "create". For example,
>
> http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/develop
>
>  transitive verb
>
>  2 b : to create or produce especially by deliberate effort over time
>        <develop new ways of doing business> <develop software>
>
> Is this an unusual meaning in the context of computer software?
> Let's look at some great software creations and how they are reported:
>
> http://www.tex.ac.uk/FAQ-whatTeX.html
> "Knuth developed the first version of TeX in 1978 to deal with ..."
>
> https://www.fsf.org/news/richard-stallman-inducted-into-the-2013-inter
>net-hall-of-fame "Stallman developed a number of widely used software
> components of GNU ..."
>
> http://www.few.vu.nl/en/news-events/news-archive/2016/jan-mrt/30th-ann
>iversary-andrew-tanenbaums-minix.aspx "Emeritus professor Andrew
> Tanenbaum developed this operating system while ..."
>
> http://sunsite.uakom.sk/sunworldonline/swol-05-1998/swol-05-perl.html
> "Larry Wall developed Perl in 1987 to simplify administrative
> reporting ..."
>
> http://www.gocertify.com/articles/python-is-the-holy-grail-so-to-speak
>-of-programming-languages.html "Ultimately Rossum developed a language
> and interpreter that immediately ..."
>
> http://memim.com/lame.html
> "... Mike Cheng developed a patch for an example implementation of an
> MP3 encoder"
>
> Cheers,
> David.

Apple, unfortunately, seems bent on doing a microsoft to cups.

The most cogent post I can find on the cups blog states:
===================
In February of 2007, Apple Inc. acquired ownership the CUPS source code 
and hired me (Michael R Sweet), the creator of CUPS.

CUPS will still be released under the existing GPL2/LGPL2 licensing 
terms, and I will continue to develop and support CUPS at Apple.

Answers to questions about the change of ownership can be found on the 
frequently asked questions page.
===================
Mike has been stating that he is chair of that department in the mailing 
list messages, which have become rather far between.  The independent 
cups.org mailing list was shut down around a year later, effectively 
putting the apple beaurocracy between the user and Mike.

This is not a Good Thing IMO. For instance, debian wheezy is stuck on 
cups-1.53, well over 6 years old. It does however, work well. I can 
print to either of the printers sitting to the right of me from any of 
the other 4 machines currently up and running on my little home network, 
so I've no beef with printing here at the coyote.den other than my 
latest ink squirter is running at 5% of its advertised speed, and seems 
bent of making its starter ink cartridges last till the rapture.  Washed 
out prints seem to be the order of the day.  But it also can handle 
11x17" paper.

Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#173072

On Sat 01 Oct 2016 at 06:03:08 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:

> Apple, unfortunately, seems bent on doing a microsoft to cups.

You are being provocative, aren't you? Quite unlike your usual self. :)

  * CUPS has not changed from being GPL.

  * Upstream CUPS is very responsive.

  * Upstream CUPS responds quickly and positively to bug reports.

  * Upstream CUPS takes notice of its Linux consumers.

  * Upstream CUPS co-operates with Linux printing system developers.

Three particulars on that last point.

  1. CUPS has incorporated systemd support into its source code.

  2. CUPS has supported interworking with Avahi.

  3. CUPS has catered for the Linux ecosystem.

All you (and I) have to do is sit back and enjoy it. Enjoy.

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#173216

On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 14:40:44 (+0100), Brian wrote:
> On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 22:02:05 +0900, Mark Fletcher wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 01:31:03PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> > > On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 20:54:32 +0900, Mark Fletcher wrote:
> > > 
> > > > On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 10:31:45PM +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > > > > On Thursday 29 September 2016 16:03:38 Mark Fletcher wrote:
> > > > > > which I find ironic
> > > > > > considering what the U of CUPS stands for
> > > > > 
> > > > > Why?  MacOSX is Unix based (via BSD) and CUPS is supposed to be common to all 
> > > > > Unices (though I have only used it on Linux and MacOSX).
> > > > > 
> > > > Precisely, Lisi. Precisely.
> > > 
> > > The "U" in CUPS officially doesn't stand for anything. The same applies
> > > to the "C", "P" and "S".
> > > 
> > According to whom, Brian? (Apart from you, obviously :) ). According to 
> > the Internet (so it _must_ be true) it stands for Common Unix Printing 
> > System. Are they, and the Gutenprint driver which prints that on its 
> > test pages, just making sh*t up then? (To be fair I don't know which 
> > component creates the test page, but I do know, because I am sitting 
> > here with one about an inch away from my left hand, that when you ask 
> > CUPS to print a test page, it prints that on the test page.)
> 
> I take it you are talking about the Debian PrinterTestPage (the logo is
> at the left hand side). Nowhere on that page does it say "Common Unix
> Printing System". Even if it did say that this is a Debian document, not an
> official upstream CUPS document. It wouldn't count.
> 
> The Internet might want CUPS to mean "Common Unix Printing System"; it
> could organise a day of protest demanding CUPS to mean "Common Unix
> Printing System"; it could sell tee shirts saying "CUPS - the Common
> Unix Printing System". That doesn't count either.
> 
> Find any significant occurance of "Common Unix Printing System" in the
> official CUPS documentation or in its source code and there would be a
> case to answer. There isn't, so there isn't. :)
> 
> The official name of the software is CUPS.

http://www.apple.com/server/docs/Print_Services_TB_v10.4.pdf
"At the heart of Mac OS X Server print services is a comprehensive,
standards-compliant open source printing architecture based on Common
UNIX Printing System (CUPS)."

https://developer.apple.com/library/content/documentation/Cocoa/Conceptual/Printing/osxp_aboutprinting/osxp_aboutprt.html
"The Common UNIX Printing System (CUPS) layer provides the low-level
services, print queue management, and driver interfaces needed to
communicate with printing devices."

cups-2.2.1/locale/cups_ca.po (source)
"#
 # "$Id$"
 #
 #   Message catalog template for the Common UNIX Printing System (CUPS).
 #
 #   Copyright 2007-2015 by Apple Inc.
 #   Copyright 2005-2007 by Easy Software Products.
 #
 #   These coded instructions, statements, and computer programs are the
 #   property of Apple Inc. and are protected by Federal copyright
 #   law.  Distribution and use rights are outlined in the file "LICENSE.txt"
 #   which should have been included with this file.  If this file is
 #   file is missing or damaged, see the license at "http://www.cups.org/". "

A couple of logos in cups-2.2.1/test/testfile.{pdf,ps} . The redition
in the latter is protected by Apple's copyright.

I suppose we now have to discuss the meaning of significant occurance [sic].

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#173221

On Wed 05 Oct 2016 at 15:10:42 -0500, David Wright wrote:

> On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 14:40:44 (+0100), Brian wrote:
> > On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 22:02:05 +0900, Mark Fletcher wrote:
> > 
> > > On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 01:31:03PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> > > > On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 20:54:32 +0900, Mark Fletcher wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 10:31:45PM +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > > > > > On Thursday 29 September 2016 16:03:38 Mark Fletcher wrote:
> > > > > > > which I find ironic
> > > > > > > considering what the U of CUPS stands for
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Why?  MacOSX is Unix based (via BSD) and CUPS is supposed to be common to all 
> > > > > > Unices (though I have only used it on Linux and MacOSX).
> > > > > > 
> > > > > Precisely, Lisi. Precisely.
> > > > 
> > > > The "U" in CUPS officially doesn't stand for anything. The same applies
> > > > to the "C", "P" and "S".
> > > > 
> > > According to whom, Brian? (Apart from you, obviously :) ). According to 
> > > the Internet (so it _must_ be true) it stands for Common Unix Printing 
> > > System. Are they, and the Gutenprint driver which prints that on its 
> > > test pages, just making sh*t up then? (To be fair I don't know which 
> > > component creates the test page, but I do know, because I am sitting 
> > > here with one about an inch away from my left hand, that when you ask 
> > > CUPS to print a test page, it prints that on the test page.)
> > 
> > I take it you are talking about the Debian PrinterTestPage (the logo is
> > at the left hand side). Nowhere on that page does it say "Common Unix
> > Printing System". Even if it did say that this is a Debian document, not an
> > official upstream CUPS document. It wouldn't count.
> > 
> > The Internet might want CUPS to mean "Common Unix Printing System"; it
> > could organise a day of protest demanding CUPS to mean "Common Unix
> > Printing System"; it could sell tee shirts saying "CUPS - the Common
> > Unix Printing System". That doesn't count either.
> > 
> > Find any significant occurance of "Common Unix Printing System" in the
> > official CUPS documentation or in its source code and there would be a
> > case to answer. There isn't, so there isn't. :)
> > 
> > The official name of the software is CUPS.
> 
> http://www.apple.com/server/docs/Print_Services_TB_v10.4.pdf
> "At the heart of Mac OS X Server print services is a comprehensive,
> standards-compliant open source printing architecture based on Common
> UNIX Printing System (CUPS)."

 brian@desktop:~$ pdfinfo Print_Services_TB_v10.4.pdf
 Title:          untitled
 Producer:       Acrobat Distiller 6.0 for Macintosh
 CreationDate:   Mon Apr  4 17:10:52 2005
 ModDate:        Thu Apr  7 12:19:13 2005

Written in 2005. Wasn't that before Apple bought CUPS? ESP used CUPS
and Common UNIX Printing System interchangably at the time, didn't it?
It would be natural for a non-copyright holder (who had licensed the
software) to follow suit.

> https://developer.apple.com/library/content/documentation/Cocoa/Conceptual/Printing/osxp_aboutprinting/osxp_aboutprt.html
> "The Common UNIX Printing System (CUPS) layer provides the low-level
> services, print queue management, and driver interfaces needed to
> communicate with printing devices."

At the bottom of the page

 Copyright © 2002, 2012 Apple Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Most likely first written in 2002. Isn't that before Apple bought CUPS?
Now read the Revision History on the same page. Looks like someone
forgot something or didn't see it as important. That is often the nature
of web pages. I provided feedback but am not holding my breath.

> cups-2.2.1/locale/cups_ca.po (source)
> "#
>  # "$Id$"
>  #
>  #   Message catalog template for the Common UNIX Printing System (CUPS).
>  #
>  #   Copyright 2007-2015 by Apple Inc.
>  #   Copyright 2005-2007 by Easy Software Products.
>  #
>  #   These coded instructions, statements, and computer programs are the
>  #   property of Apple Inc. and are protected by Federal copyright
>  #   law.  Distribution and use rights are outlined in the file "LICENSE.txt"
>  #   which should have been included with this file.  If this file is
>  #   file is missing or damaged, see the license at "http://www.cups.org/". "

Good catch. This is the only file in all the source code which has that
line in it. A reasonable person would ask themselves - is this
deliberate or is it an oversight? Does it have significance weighed up
against all the other evidence? Would a bug report produce a change or
not? Is there life after solving printing queries on -user?

> A couple of logos in cups-2.2.1/test/testfile.{pdf,ps} . The redition
> in the latter is protected by Apple's copyright.

The PS file does have the copyright Apple. It was originally in the ESP
distribution but the logo and the file became Apple's. I'm unsure what
the logo proves though; apart from the fact that the association of "C"
with "Common" is a link to the pre-Apple era.  That's ok; after all, it
is only a logo, not a declaration of the official name of the software.

The PDF is an original ESP document.

> I suppose we now have to discuss the meaning of significant occurance [sic].

It's akin to deciphering the Rosetta Stone. We would make a good team.

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web