Package Details: pantum-p1000-p2000-p3000-m5100-m5200-ppd-driver 1.00_1-4

Git Clone URL: (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: pantum-p1000-p2000-p3000-m5100-m5200-ppd-driver
Description: PPDs, drivers, for Pantum P1000, P2000, P3000, M5100, M5200 printers
Upstream URL:
Keywords: cups driver pantum ppd printer
Licenses: proprietary
Conflicts: pantum-p2000-driver
Submitter: ron2138
Maintainer: ron2138
Last Packager: ron2138
Votes: 1
Popularity: 0.000001
First Submitted: 2020-03-24 16:22 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2020-03-24 16:22 (UTC)

Latest Comments

ron2138 commented on 2020-03-24 16:34 (UTC)

New name and description for the pantum-p2000-driver package: New name is pantum-p1000-p2000-p3000-m5100-m5200-ppd-driver. Description of the package has also been changed. Changes meant to better describe the supported printers. Both packages support the same printers, in exactly the same way. The new package has to conflicts('pantum-p2000-driver'). I intend to ask to delete the pantum-p2000-driver package.

ron2138 commented on 2020-03-17 15:56 (UTC)

Thank you for your work. Yes, I will take over. Give me a few days.

snackattack commented on 2020-03-17 15:38 (UTC)

I no longer have a pantum printer nor the bandwidth to maintain this, would you like to take over as maintainer?

ron2138 commented on 2020-03-17 09:51 (UTC) (edited on 2020-03-17 12:25 (UTC) by ron2138)

  1. As of this writing, the package creates ppd files for Pantum P{10,20,30,51,52}00 models, or series. I think this should be made obvious, perhaps by using the package name or description.
  2. While creating the package, makepkg interactively queries the user about files replacement. I think this is disturbing and undesired, since it is not required at all. As far as I can tell, it is due to the unzip line at the build() function. I think the absence of a prepare function makes makepkg automatically unzip the archive prior to running the build() function. Which renders the unzip line at the build() function redundant, and causes the interactive queries. I suggest to remove that line.
  3. I find the comment in the build() function about the sadness of bsdtar not accurate. I think it is a quoting issue.

To summarize, I have uploaded a suggested patch to

snackattack commented on 2017-11-21 16:25 (UTC)

Thanks. I have updated the PKGBUILD to remove rpm2cpio and the rpmextract makedep.

Scimmia commented on 2017-11-21 03:23 (UTC)

bsdtar will exract the rpm just fine, no need for rpm2cpio or the useless rpmextrace makedep.