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

(forw) Re: (forw) #175239: What are valid fax formats


I asked mgettys upstream. Please find Gerts answer below.

IMHO the "ghostscript installation" doesn't count for us, as Debians
ghostscript supports it.


----- Forwarded message from Gert Doering <gert@greenie.muc.de> -----

From: Gert Doering <gert@greenie.muc.de>
Reply-To: mgetty@muc.de
To: Andreas Barth <aba@not.so.argh.org>, mgetty@muc.de
Subject: Re: (forw) #175239: What are valid fax formats
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2004 22:17:09 +0200
Message-ID: <20040408221708.J14827@greenie.muc.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
X-Spam-Score: / 0.0


On Thu, Apr 08, 2004 at 09:45:45PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> what do you think about that question?
> Should this be regarded as a bug in tetex-bin? If yes, should we revert
> to the old form or provide a switch for both formats? Or is the format
> that efax understands (raw G3 data) deprecated?
> Thanks in advance, Frank
> P.S. 
> raw G3 is produced with 
> gs -q -dSAFER -sDEVICE=faxg3 -r$res -sOutputFile=$NAME-%03d.fax -sNOPAUSE -
> (where $res is, configurable, 204x196 or 204x98)
> group 3 fax is produced with 
> gs -q -dSAFER -sDEVICE=dfaxhigh -sOutputFile=$NAME-%03d.fax -sNOPAUSE -
> (or replace dfaxhigh by dfaxlo)

Mgetty's sendfax won't care (both output formats are understood).

I have changed mgetty's faxspool to use "faxg3" instead of "dfaxhigh" some
years ago because most ghostscript installations have the faxg3 driver
compiled in by default, and "dfaxhigh" needs to be enabled explicitely
when compiling ghostscript.

So from that point of view, I'd recommend to use faxg3.

There are good arguments against faxg3, though - it has no header to store
the actual resolution in, and some versions of the ghostscript drivers
happen to create faxg3 files that are not 1728 pixels wide, which breaks
faxing to standard compliant receivers (mgetty's g3cat fixes that

None of these points are strong enough, IMHO, to strongly recommend one 
format or the other.


USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany                             gert@greenie.muc.de
fax: +49-89-35655025                        gert@net.informatik.tu-muenchen.de

----- End forwarded message -----

   PGP 1024/89FB5CE5  DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F  3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C

Reply to: