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

Re: postscript-enabled mozilla package anyone?

On Wed, 07 Jul 2004 09:51:47 +0200
Thomas Winischhofer <thomas@winischhofer.net> wrote:
> > Xprint output is a solid 100% better than PostScript/default. But then
> > I haven't tried it in a while.
> I installed it on my CUPS-running system. The result is a printout in 
> max 100 dpi on all of my 6 laserjets and no proper color-to-greyscale 
> conversion (looks like black & white). Frankly, it looks like the result 
> from a dot-matrix.

That sounds like a packaging problem. To increase resolution, try

*default-printer-resolution: 600

in /usr/lib/X11/xserver/C/print/attributes/document or wherever that file
is. If that works, the maintainer or packager should know most printers
support 600dpi at this point. I don't see why that's Xprint's fault [1].

> I never had ANY problem with postscript directly from Mozilla... and I 
> really print a lot.

Well I'm not advocating removing PostScript/default. I'm just trying to
point out that Xprint is not what some people on this list claim it is.

> And I cannot understand why I would need yet another printing system on 
> my box,

Xprint is not a "printing system". If you have CUPS *that* is a printing
system. Xprint is an X server that accepts connections from clients that
can draw to it but instead of rendering the output on a screen it sends
it to the "printing system". That's all.

> obviously requiring manual setup. I refuse to learn how Xprint 
> works in order to make my box print. (Hell, this is 2004 and I need to 
> fiddle in conf files to make a program print.)

If it requires additional setup to get a perfect printout then a bug
report should be filed so that the package maintainer can learn how to
create a proper deb.


[1] the problem might be that the printing system interface (lpq,
lpadmin) is not sophisticated enough to communicate information like
DPI capability.

Greedo shoots first? Not in my Star Wars.

Reply to: