[gutsy] only the first user created can change printer configs

[Felipe Figueiredo]

Binary package hint: cupsys

This happens on my two boxes: one was upgraded from feisty, the other is a fresh gutsy install.

When any user (included in lpadmin group, and every other available in users-admin, FWIW) tries to change any config in the printer (say, resolution) the user is greeted with a password prompt (not gksu) saying "password for $user in localhost". Since the user's password is never accepted, I assume this is supposed to login directly into CUPS, not passwd/shadow. Never works.

The first user (the one created during the install), however, is not greeted for password, and can automatically change any config available there. I assume the user created at installation is the CUPS's root user, but I thought adding other users to some group (say, lpadmin, or whatever) should grant them permission to manage CUPS as well. That seems not to be the case.

I think users should be aware if they can or cannot set printer options, and if not, they shouldn't be offered options they can't choose from.

[Till Kamppeter (till-kamppeter)]

This is a problem of the user management tool of GNOME. It does not correctly add the users to the desired groups. Please check your /etc/group file to see whether the desired users are really in the lpadmin group. If not, add them by editing the file manually or using another user management tool.

CUPS and system-config-printer (gnome-cups-manager is obsolete) are working correctly. All users in the lpadmin group can do printer administration tasks without further authentication. In the CUPS web interface user name and password have to be from any user in the lpadmin group.

Moving the bug to GNOME's user management tool.

[Felipe Figueiredo (philsf)]

Till,

you are correct. The users were not added to the lpadmin group, and after I manually added them, they could do printer administration tasks as expected.

Should we close this bug and open another one if there's not already been done, or change this one to reflect the proper problem (users-admin not handling groups correctly)?

[Till Kamppeter (till-kamppeter)]

You have already done the right thing marking this bug as duplicate of an earlier report of the same problem. You do neither need to report a new bug as the problem is already reported and investigated nor you need to close this bug, as duplicates are automatically closed.

Please report further observations and do further discussion concerning this issue in bug 152107.

Thank you very much for your bug report.