[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#953104: hplip: After upgrade to version 3.20.2 of hplip, nothing can be printed



notfound 953104 3.19.12+dfsg0-4
found 953104 3.20.2+dfsg0-1
thanks



On Wed, Mar 04, 2020 at 03:36:30PM +0000, Brad Rogers wrote:
> Package: hplip
> Version: 3.19.12+dfsg0-4
> Severity: important
> 
> Dear Maintainer,
> 
> Running Debian Testing.
> 
> After upgrading to v3.20.2 of hplip, my system could no longer print anything.
> Print jobs were being sent
> to the printer (display panel illuminated to indicate something was
> communicating with the printer) but
> would never complete, and jobs eventually timed out with a communication error.
> 
> Downgrading to version 3.19.12 of hplip has allowed me to continue printing
> again.
> The printer is an HP OfficeJet 6700 Premium (an all-in-one-device)
> 
> It has been pointed out to me on the Debian User mailing list, that there was a
> recent change in CUPS;
> 
> >> cups (2.3.1-5) unstable; urgency=medium
> >>
> >>   * Move towards driverless-centered installation:
> >>     - Drop all printer-driver-* and hplip recommends/suggests
> >>   * Cleanup all versions from pre- Debian stable
> >>   * Bump S-V to 4.5.0 without changes needed
> >>
> 
> which may have some impact on hplip and its interaction with CUPS.

Thank you for your report and help, Brad.

Extensive discuussion on this issue has taken place at

  https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2020/03/msg00106.html

Debugging has been carried out from

  https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2020/03/msg00116.html

onwards.

Summary:
	* The filtering system works.
	* An hpcups raster file sent directly to the printer prints.
	* The same file sent with lp -o raw fails to print.

The conclusion at the present time is that the hp backend is failing.
I thought at first it might be #932246

  https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=932246

but there is no sign it is involved.

(The previous mail? Y is three keys fom E. I still managed to hit the
wrong one).

Regards,

Brian.


Reply to: