Considering how this patch made it into Gnome without noticing the distro specific requirements, especially noting these lines that should have raised a red flag or at least an eyebrow:
I'd say complaining to GNOME devs probably won't make much difference. I know no one's perfect, but I wold have thought that their patches underwent a little more scrutiny and required some level of review before inclusion.
Anyway, am I correct in assuming the easiest fix would be a to point the printer configuration launcher (correct terminology?) in gnome control center to point to system-config-printer?
Considering how this patch made it into Gnome without noticing the distro specific requirements, especially noting these lines that should have raised a red flag or at least an eyebrow:
+#define FIREWALLD_BUS "org.fedoraproj ect.FirewallD" ject/FirewallD" ect.FirewallD"
+#define FIREWALLD_PATH "/org/fedorapro
+#define FIREWALLD_IFACE "org.fedoraproj
I'd say complaining to GNOME devs probably won't make much difference. I know no one's perfect, but I wold have thought that their patches underwent a little more scrutiny and required some level of review before inclusion.
Anyway, am I correct in assuming the easiest fix would be a to point the printer configuration launcher (correct terminology?) in gnome control center to point to system- config- printer?