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

Re: Firefox no print issue

Almut Behrens wrote:
On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 10:47:14PM -0500, Jim Hall wrote:

No matter what I do, this prints on the first page. Each line starts at the end of the previous one (meaning they're staggered).

<</HWResolution[600 600]>>setpagedevice
%%Pages: (atend)

That "<</HWResolution[600 600]>>setpagedevice" is not supposed to occur
in that position, i.e. before the %!PS line (also, it's pretty useless,
anyway[1]). Although those %-lines are just comments[2], postscript-wise,
the problem is that many printers use those first 4 chars "%!PS" to
auto-detect whether to switch into PS- or text-mode.  It looks as if
your printer is one of those, obediently printing out the whole PS code
as plain text... ;(

The printer is a QMS1660. It is configured as Postscript Level 2. I don't think (repeat: don't think) it switchs modes, but it understands and deals with more than PS. Or is that what you meant? It's been chugging along just fine for a long time until I tried to get Firefox to print. That's when it started to print the PS code as text. It's been over the cliff since then. The Win 98 systems still print with no trouble at all. <Grrrrrr>

I suspect it's CUPS's "pstops" filter - not Firefox - that's adding
that superfluous setpagedevice stuff via PPD infos.  So, next thing to
try would be to send the PS file directly/unfiltered to the printer[3].
Try lp/lpr option "-o raw" (http://www.cups.org/doc-1.1/sum.html#4_7 )
for that.  If you just want to print the file as it drops out of
Firefox (i.e. without any n-page-up transformations, duplex printing,
etc.), you should normally not need any pstops processing...

You may be right about CUPS because now every app on the system is doing the same thing that Firefox does! Now, nothing prints.

I can read the docs and figure out how to do what you suggest, but otherwise, I don't understand what you're talking about. All I did with CUPS was tell it where the printer is and what it is. I've never seen a "pstops" filter or "n-page-up transformations". The printer is not capable of duplex printing, so, of course, it's greyed out or not selected. I have orders to do all setups/configs/repairs by GUI, not command line, which may explain why I haven't seen the things you're talking about.

As for PPD's, every pkg that starts with "foomatic" was installed at the same time I installed CUPS. GS is also installed.


[1] it's meant to make your printer print at 600 dpi.  Except in very
rare cases, it's undesirable to explicitly tell a printer the physical
resolution to print at.  Almost any printer will default to the highest
possible value -- which is typically what you want anyway, as it gives
best print quality.  Also, not all printers can switch hardware
resolution, so the printer might even refuse to print at all in that
case.  In short, setpagedevice often does more harm than good...

The Lab Committee doesn't want to print above 600x600 (it can, and it can switch unless overridden). It's a waste of toner and no user needs higher resolution. I'd have to check the printers settings, but I believe it is set to 600x600. But, if that's the case, then are you saying I don't need to, or shouldn't, specify the resolution in CUPS?

For anyone interested, all the technical details can be found here:
section 6.1.1 / p.394ff, or p.414 specifically.
(I could add a whole rant on other incorrect usage of setpagedevice,
but I won't -- it might get long, and come across more emotional than
what people would expect here... ;)

I would probably welcome your rant, but, at this point, I don't believe I'd understand most of it. :)

[2] DSC comments, more precisely (Document Structuring Conventions):

[3] your printer does handle PostScript natively, does it??  In case
not, your problem would be an entirely different one... (i.e. CUPS not
being set up to do the then required PS -> PCL filtering).

As I said above: PS Level 2. Because of this I don't think I needed to configure "PS -> PCL filtering".

I hope this reply is helpful. I'm sorry if the constraints I have to deal with make a solution harder than it might otherwise be.


Reply to: