Re: printing from within emacs, without having "lpr"

[Emanuel Berg]

martin.sputnik@gmail.com writes:

> I meant, it'smore dignified to print a buffer
> directly from emacs (as it is intended to be)
> as opposed to write to file, and then print
> from a shell or similar.

Both ways are fine ways to do it.

> Very silly actually: the problem was: the new
> print command was "print". But it turned out
> not to be the ``real'' print command,
> it's a shell-script wrapper for the real
> command "pushprint", perhaps print was deemed
> more "userfriendly" terminology.

Because 'print' is already often a built-in
shell command (similar to echo) *and* and
a symlink to a specific usage of mailcap
(run-mailcap), shadowing it with yet another
layer is bound to create confusion.

> Unfortunately, the parameter passing does not
> work properly in the wrapper, which means,
> using "print" as "lpr-command" results in
> that the buffer content gets lost on the way
> and is not printed. With pushprint it works
> (as long as I can avoid being asked for
> password).

Actually, the error message you got looked like
mailcap! If the admins didn't set up the
"pushprint" wrapper/alias in the -env file
(e.g., .zshenv for zsh; should be something
similar for bash) - if they didn't do that,
even tho "print" is "pushprint" in the shell,
it is still mailcap in Emacs!

-- 
underground experts united .... http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573
Emacs Gnus Blogomatic ......... http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573/blogomatic
                   - so far: 55 Blogomatic articles -