CUPS question

I'm trying to get my Brother 5070N working via CUPS. Even though I downloaded the PPD and put it in /usr/share/cups/model it doesn't show up for me to select. I've also tried using the install option via the gnome-cups-manager but it either tells me that it's already installed (if the PPD I select is in the above folder) or that it's missing an adobe header file (if I move the ppd to root and select it from there.)
What's the secret? I notice that there are a lot more files in ppd.gz format in /usr/share/cups/model/C/ Do I have to compress the ppd or something?
PS: I also have taken the PPD directly from my install CD but have the same problem. I've checked permissions and ownership and they are ok.

No, I hadn't restarted CUPS (I wish I could blame that on lack of coffee but truthfully this didn't even occur to me). After doing that the PPD shows up as expected. Many thanks!

Similar Messages

CUP question -GRC 5.3

Hi All,
Can some one clear my doubt please
1. In CUP Roles section , If I have 2 systems connected( ex : DEV and QAT) to my server when I export the role tempalte and fill in the Role attributes bla bla and when I want to import this file back I can only do it based on the System connector which is either DEV or QAT .
But however most of the roles in here are the same in DEV and QAT and in the role template's system coloumn the systems are seprated as (R/3 QUALITY(P),R/3 DEVELOPMENT(P))
so should be saving the file for each system name and import it twice , once for DEV and once for QAT even though they are similar roles ?
2.Can some one clear my doubt please
1. In CUP Roles section , If I have 2 systems connected( ex : DEV and QAT) to my server when I export the role tempalte and fill in the Role attributes bla bla and when I want to import this file back I can only do it based on the System connector which is either DEV or QAT .
But however most of the roles in here are the same in DEV and QAT and in the role template's system coloumn the systems are seprated as (R/3 QUALITY(P),R/3 DEVELOPMENT(P))
so should be saving the file for each system name and import it twice , once for DEV and once for QAT even though they are similar roles ?
2. And is there a way to create an action type in Request type , for example in request trype " change"
there is only two actions to change_user & assign_roles, what if I want to delete roles for any user or replace roles by choosing change request type.
can some one help me here
Regards
PKK

Hi PKK,
Here is my response to your questions:
1. In CUP Roles section , If I have 2 systems connected( ex : DEV and QAT) to my server when I export the role tempalte and fill in the Role attributes bla bla and when I want to import this file back I can only do it based on the System connector which is either DEV or QAT .
But however most of the roles in here are the same in DEV and QAT and in the role template's system coloumn the systems are seprated as (R/3 QUALITY(P),R/3 DEVELOPMENT(P))
so should be saving the file for each system name and import it twice , once for DEV and once for QAT even though they are similar roles ?
You must not import the same file again. If you try to do that either it will fail or it will overwrite existing roles. Rolename is the primary key here so be careful. Try uploading the file by specifying both the connectors in the system column and it will work without any problem. Selecting connector name on the top has not effect on importing file. The connector name is only used when you directly import roles from SAP backend system.
2. And is there a way to create an action type in Request type , for example in request trype " change"
there is only two actions to change_user & assign_roles, what if I want to delete roles for any user or replace roles by choosing change request type.
NO. Actions come out of box with CUP. Why do you want to create new actions? The assign_roles can add and remove roles.
Regards,
Alpesh

CUPS - Question about associating users to lines on phones

Hello all,
We are in the process of migrating to an Exchange e-mail environment and at the same time trying to get everything ready for a CUPC deployment. The CUPS server was set up some many months ago, but still has not been put into production so we are finding things that have been missed and need to be cleaned up before deploying to end users.
The main issue I am facing right now is that not all users were associated to line appearances on their phones. I would have to say maybe 35% of them are set up properly and the other 65% are not associated at all. I am looking for a way to export all the line appearances that do not have users associated to them, but so far I have had no luck. The closest I have gotten is going to Bulk Administration>Users>Line Appearance>Export Line Appearance, but this only shows users that are associated, which is not what I need.
Does anyone know of a way to get this in bulk format? Or if there are multiple exports I can compare with to get what I am looking for?
Also side question: Does anyone know what the Owner User ID on the phone itself is needed for. All I find is that it is for CDR records.
Any help is much appreciated!

The bulk update of line appearances are looking for the following headers at a minimum.
User ID,Device,Directory Number,Partition
The way i would do it is, use Bulk Admin>Phones>Export Phones>Specific Details of all the phones for which the line appearances needs to be updated and add the User ID field and import it back in. Once you export it out, you will have to do some kind of modification of the data to get it in the right format.
The Owner User ID field is used for Mobility option, this field is used when there is a mobility softkey enabled and this User ID is what controls whose Mobility is turned off and on.

CUP question - Possible to restrict available roles based on the requester?

Helo all,
One of our customers wants to put restrictions on the access requester in the CUP module: meaning that some requesters should only be able to request roles assigned to functional area u2018Procurementu2019, while other requesters should only be able to request roles that are assigned to all functional areau2019s except for u2018Procurementu2019.
Do you know if this is possible or do you see an alternative solution?
Thanks in advance,

There is no real way to restrict people from doing that, but you could use the buisness process in role attributes to ensure if the select the correct buisness process only roles listed under a particular buisness process are listed when being searched.
You could make the buisness process field mandatory on the main screen and than that gets carried over when searching for roles, obviuosly that can always be changed by the user.
regards,
Chinmaya

Approver question for CUP

Hi GRC guru's
As we are in the process of customizing CUP ,I have couple of questions so kindly help me out here
1. When requestor select roles which belong different approvers how does the request gets processed
example roles selected are Z_XYZ who's role approver is Tom and second role Z_ABC with role approver John , how is this request handled ?
2. When you run risk anlysisin CUP and you find out that there are risks and there is no mitiagtion control in RAR for risk produced , how will the approver proceed ? should he go back and perform the mitigation in RAR and then mitiagte the risk in CUP or is there a way to mitigate the new risk in CUP which can then be automaticallly pushed to RAR ?
3. Is there way to populate user group in the access request form and is there way to populate the license type in CUP?
Kindly clear my doubts ,Thanks in advance
Regards
Keith.

Hi Alpesh and all
I would like to follow up with your answer to Keith's question below.
1. When requestor select roles which belong different approvers how does the request gets processed
example roles selected are Z_XYZ who's role approver is Tom and second role Z_ABC with role approver John , how is this request handled ? Both the role owner would get email and can approve the request at same time. Unless untill both these approvers approve/reject the request, request can not move to next stage.
My question,
Is there a way to allow users to submit one request with 2 roles with different approvers, if the 1st approver approved the role, the 1st role to be provisioned to immediately without having to wait for the 2nd approver to approve the 2nd role?
The two roles both satisfy the critiria of the same initiator (attribute Role, and both roles are in the role list). Since the roles fall under the same path and stage (only 1 role owern approval stage), I noticed the 1st approved role was not provisioned until the 2nd role is approved. Is there a way to work arond that? It make sense to go ahead provision the 1st role without having to waiting for the 2nd role to be approved or rejected. The roles have the same approval requirement so they should use the same initiator and workflow path.
If you or anybody knows the work around, I would appreciate your sharing the info.
Thanks.
p.s.
I did a test to submit a request with 2 roles, each role satisfy a different workflow initiator therefore different paths are used. 1st role was approved through 1st path and provisioned immediately while 2nd role was waiting in approval stage in the 2nd path. The request is closed once both path were completed.

GRC and CUP and Mobiliity question

Hello GRC friends:
In an environment where GRC and CUP are configured and working, the question came to me,
can the requests for the Firefighter ID be sent to a mobile device?
The person responsible for the request approval must now sign on thier PC.
Are there any known impediments to sending these to say an iPAD to be approved?
Thank you in advance for your assistance.
Regards,
Joe Gonzales
856 912 1136

HI Josep!
There are some applications for mobile devices that you'll be able to find here: http://ecohub.sap.com/store/mobility
This particular application is for GRC approval:http://ecohub.sap.com/store/mobility/catalog/#!solution:SAPGRCAccessApprover
I don't know the cost and if it's available in your country neither....
Cheers,
Diego.

CUP 5.3 SP8 - Questions

Hi all,
I would like to know if you can help me on the following topics :
- in a "Change account" request, is it possible to avoid the ability to ADD a role already assigned to the user ?
- in a "Change account" request, to change the validity date of a role already assigned to the user ?
- to DISABLE the possibility to CREATE a new mitigitaing control from CUP ?   I would like them to use RAR only for that !
Thanks in advance
Michel

Hi Shweta,
thank you for your answers.
Regarding the point 2 ('Yes, you can select the role again which is already asisgned to user and then can change its validity and provision it.)
--> I have tested it. If user has alredy role A in SAP backend with validity date 31.12.9999 and in CUP I make a Change account request with role A with validity date to 01.08.2009
     1°) I use role action   ADD     --> the system is not changing the validity date of already assinged role A but assign a second time role A with validity date 01.08.2009   --> in the backend user a role A validity date 31.12.9999 AND role A validity date 01.08.2009
    2°) I use role action KEEP --> the system is doing nothing   (validity date remains unchanged 31.12.9999)
--> is there another way to do it ?
For point 1 and 3 thank you it answers my question.
regards
Michel

Question on CUPS and Phone Presence

I have what I hope is a simple question. I have CUCM 8.5(1) and CUPS 8.6(3) deployed. My question is about phone presence status in the CUPS Presence Viewer application.
In my configuration I can see the presence status of an individual phone line when that line is on a call but when that phone is not on a call the Presence Status displays as "Unavailable". Further, when looking at the user's devices in CUPS Presence Viewer I can see the associated lines but they are displayed as "unknown".
Shouldn't I be able to see an available status when the phone line is idle?
I have checked and configured the following:
1. Presence groups and inter-presence group subscriptions are allowed
2. CUPS SIP Trunk is provisioned with appropriate SIP profile mods
3. CUCM Call Manager service has associated CUPS trunk
4. Users are associated to the line(s) under test
5. Presence CSS's are defined in a manner that should allow presence viewing
Any thoughts?
Regards,Bill

Hi Bill
AFAIK it's always worked like that - unless a user explicitly logs in to a presence client, he's not 'available'. i.e. the presence of a line on the system isn't enough to make him 'available'.
So he has to log in to CUPC or Phone Messenger (urgh) to be 'available'.
Being based on EM status, CFA status, or inactivity timers on the user's lines would seem like a good idea but I don't think the functionality is there. Of course, it might be - the documentation for this product has always left a fair amount to the imagination.
Aaron

Approver Determinator CUP (Controller) Question

Hello, I had a few questions when trying to use the (Controller) as Approver Determinator for our SPM work flow.
Everything is working perfectly fine using a CAD as the approver. But when I switch it over to the (Controller) I'm having some issues.
Questions:
1) Where would you configure the Controller's email address for approval notification? Guessing the SU01 record? This is different from other approvers who are configured within the UME
2) Won't the (Controller) need a CUP UME role to enter through the approval link sent out via email? Currently we only have controller in the backend ECC systems and view access to SPM reports through a UME view FF role.
3) Do we need to run a background job to send emails for the controller in the ABAP system or just the standard one in CUP?
Thanks!

There are "controllers" in SPM that you add to an FF_ID which then monitors logs. There is also a "controller" within the approver determinator drop down in a stage. I was wondering if these are the same. So if you use "controller" as your approver determinator for a certain FF ID in CUP will send for approval to the person define against the ID in the FF table.

CUP 5.3 SP8 - Authentication Source/User Details Source question

Hello,
Here is another issue I'm noticing with CUP.
Currently we have it configured as such:
Authentication Source: LDAP
Search Data Sourec: SAPHR
User Details Data Source: SAPHR
When a Requestor logs in to create a request for themself, Requestor Username and Email are correctly populated under the Requestor section of the request screen. This Username and Email match identically from SAPHR; and it should, as that is what we have defined as our User Data Source
When a Requestor logs in to create a request for another user, Requestor Username and Email are populated differently under the Requestor section of the request screen; this information in this case appears to be coming from LDAP. This does not seem correct to me. LDAP is only defined as the Authentication Source, not the User Data Source.
1) Why would the Requestor section populate differently when creating a request for yourself vs. another user?
2) Is this a bug in CUP?
3) Has anyone else noticed this or found a fix?
Thanks!!
Jes

We are on the same SP level and are configured similarly but don't see this issue.
Data Source - LDAP
Search - SAP
Datasource - Multiple (SAPHR, SAP(BI), LDAP, SAP(SRM))
Also, our LDAP does not carry the email address (yet).
When I create a new request for someone else, all the information is filled in correctly from our SAPHR system, if they are in HR, or from our BI system if they are not in HR but are in BI. However, since we don't carry e-mail address in our LDAP system yet, the requestor e-mail field is left blank and I have to manually fill it in. (We do plan on changing this).
Hope this helps,
Peggy

Question on best version of CUPC to use with CUPS 7.0(8)

Hello
I just loaded CUPS version 7.0(8) and was not sure of the best version of CUPC to use on the client/
I saw there is a engineering release for CUPC 7.1.1a but I can find the reedme they mention that talks about specific fixes in that version.
I also downloaded CUPC version 7.1.2 and 7.0.2 just in case.
I am using CUCM version 7.1.5
thanks

I would go for the latest 7.1(2), if TAC identifies an existing defect it would require an upgrade anyways as no fixes will be provided for those older releases. So not really a point in starting off with those old releases for an initial deployment. For that same reason you may want to load 7.0(9) on CUP. Both CUP 7.0(9) and CUPC 7.1(2) are fully tested releases and not engineering specials.

J2EE 5.0 questions esp. re: "First Cup of Java"

Ok So I downloaded the latest "First Cup of Java".
I have Win XP Home. (Not professional).
I can't seem to find J2EE 5.0
I see SDK 5.0, and I have Net Beans 5.0. I downloaded the J2EE SDK, not the whole package. (B/C i don't have xp pro).
Can anyone help me re: this? I can't use the @ headers b/c supposedly i dont have EE 5.0.
-a little confused.

You don't need EE. That's the Enterprise Edition. It's for doing more advanced, complex things than you'll be ready for for a while.
J2SE 5.0 SDK is what you want--should be spelled out in the "First Cup" stuff.
When you say you "can't use the @ headers," can you be more specifc? Paste in the exact code you created and what you did to compile it, and exactly what error message you got.
When you post code, please use[code] and [/code] tags as described in Formatting tips on the message entry page. It makes it much easier to read.
Does First Cup use NetBeans? I thought it use the command line. Follow its instructions exactly. Don't even try to use NetBeans yet.

New to CUPS - really quick question

Hello,
I've been working on implementing CUPS and integrating it with LDAP. It seems to be working so far, am able to authenticate with AD credentials into Personal Communicator. I'm running version 7 in the lab. I find that I can log into it okay with Personal Communitcator version 7 but not with version 8. Is Personal Communicator's compatible with all versions or do I need to use a specific one for each?

CUPC 8.X is not compatibile with CUPS 7.X. See the following data sheet for CUPC 8.0 listing CUPS 8.0 or newer as supported CUPS.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/voicesw/ps6789/ps6836/ps6844/data_sheet_c78-609335.html
HTH,
Chris

Je ne suis pas capable de récupérer mes réponses secrètes car il y a la mauvaise addresse de messagerie pour réinitialiser mes questions secrètes.

BOnjour
jai un problème avec mes questions secrètes. Je veux les réinitialiser car jai perdu mes réponses mais l'addresse affichée n'est pas bon. C'est marqué hotmil au lieu de hotmail.

Vous devez demander à Apple de réinitialiser vos questions de sécurité. Pour ce faire, cliquez ici et choisissez une méthode; si cette page ne est pas une liste pour votre pays ou vous êtes incapable d'appeler, remplir et soumettre ce formulaire.
(122224)

GRC CUP Custom Approver Determinator Question

I have a problem that when I add a new approver to one of my Custom approver determinators the change is only applied to new requests at that stage or rerouted requests. Has anyone seen this or know why?

Hi,
Lets say ABC is the approver and the requests that are approved in the previous level are with ABC approver queue. Since ABC approver is no more in the organization, you have changed the approver in the configuration and you require all the requests to be assigned automatically to the new approver.
If this is what you are looking at, its not possible.
You have to manually re-route the requests to the new approver.
Regards,
Raghu

CUPS question

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for