hplip.uci


Forum: Printers
Topic: hplip.uci
started by: buzzard

Posted by buzzard on Oct. 04 2007,03:05
I had downloaded hplip directly from HP, but couldn't get it
to compile on my DSL machine.  Its system requirements would
have me bloat my machine beyond all recognition.

I notice now your hplip.uci under the testing section...
Before I go downloading that (24 meg), can anyone tell
me if its system requirements are less than what hp itself
has listed?  like, has it already been compiled here?

Posted by Juanito on Oct. 04 2007,03:41
The hplip extension was compiled on dsl - note that it also contains cups, some elements of sane, esp-ghostscript and libraries for usb, tiff, jpeg, png & openssl.

I'm working on a smaller version - with the binaries and libraries stripped, it's around 21MB...

Posted by stupid_idiot on Oct. 05 2007,20:26
Hi Juanito:
(1) Perhaps we could use < cups.dsl > for cups?
HPLIP's < system requirements page > says cups v1.1.15 is needed. The version in mydsl is v1.1.14.
Perhaps we can upgrade 'cups.dsl' and then remove cups from hplip?
(2) Since tiff, jpeg, png & openssl are already in DSL, is it possible to omit them from the hplip extension?

Thanks!

Posted by Juanito on Oct. 06 2007,03:52
Quote
(1) Perhaps we could use cups.dsl for cups?
HPLIP's system requirements page says cups v1.1.15 is needed. The version in mydsl is v1.1.14.

- The version in the hplip extension is cups-1.2.11, but wouldn't the sum of the two parts be the same as the whole (unless you're thinking an earlier version would be smaller)?

Quote
(2) Since tiff, jpeg, png & openssl are already in DSL, is it possible to omit them from the hplip extension?

- I thought the idea for applications compiled in /opt was that they should be self-contained in terms of libs? You're right, jpeg could be dropped, but I would need to check the versions of the other libs - some of them might need to be newer than the base dsl.

Posted by stupid_idiot on Oct. 06 2007,04:32
Quote (Juanito @ Oct. 06 2007,07:52)
- The version in the hplip extension is cups-1.2.11, but wouldn't the sum of the two parts be the same as the whole (unless you're thinking an earlier version would be smaller)?

I am sorry my post was unclear - actually, I was thinking it is better for many extensions to share one cups.dsl. They can all be much smaller (cups.dsl is currently 5.7M).

p.s. With regard to < python-2.3.uci >, size could be reduced by removing all ".pyc" and ".pyo" files. This will increase startup time of scripts, but does not affect actual performance. This is why < python2.5.uci > is 'only' 3.3M.
p.p.s. I will rename 'python2.5.uci' to 'python-2.5.uci'. I will change the writeable dir to '/opt/py-25/' also.

Posted by Juanito on Oct. 06 2007,06:00
Quote
actually, I was thinking it is better for many extensions to share one cups.dsl.

- Ah, OK - I see what you mean. cups would have to be re-compiled to another directory and there would be a lot of interdependecies with hplip and samba-3 to sort out. I guess cups and hplip would also want to share some of the same libs.

Let me think about this a while.

Powered by Ikonboard 3.1.2a
Ikonboard © 2001 Jarvis Entertainment Group, Inc.