Re: lpd: the thin edge of the wedge?

On Feb 24, 2026, at 7:22 PM, Greg 'groggy' Lehey <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> You've caught me here.  I had never heard of IPP.  My understanding is
> that it, too, is not supported by the base system.  What would it take
> to change that?  It looks as if it could be a good alternative.

CUPS!

> Declaring lpd obsolete would be fine then, and people who really want
> it could then use a port.
> 
> But CUPS is not the answer either, for most of the same reasons.  In
> addition, a comment from Theo (who confirmed that nobody had spoken to
> the OpenBSD community):
> 
>  well, let them enjoy cups.  I have studied that monster a few times.
>  it is a huge piece of software lacking any attempt at a security
>  architecture, and a culture around it that will never make changes.
>  in such circumstances, i always stick to small pieces of software
>  where we can hopefully delineate the boundaries.

Note that CUPS is maintained unlike BSD's lpd & it also used on MacOS.
It is licensed under Apache-2.0 and some exceptions. It comes with a
collection of programs including lpr, lpd etc.

It doesn't make sense to try to do a from-scratch lpd that supports IPP,
or spend any resources on such an effort as this is a complex subsystem.
Or updating lpd & friends to talk to modern printers.

Normally I am a fan of maintaining old programs but it doesn't seem
worth it here.