Re: Wheezy printing problem: 2 identical (?) machines and 1 does not print PDFs
On Sat 26 May 2012 at 09:58:31 +0000, Camaleón wrote:
> On Fri, 25 May 2012 18:51:16 +0100, Brian wrote:
> > Not quite. The PPD file/driver combination has to produce a file which,
> > when sent to the printer, is understandable by the printer. The
> > Gutenprint driver. for example, will always send PCL to an HP2200
> > because, even though the printer can understand PostScript, the driver
> > is designed to output only in the native language of the printer.
>
> But that only happens when the printer does not natively support PS which
> does not seem to be the case; according to the printer specs¹ it features
> HP PCL 6, HP PCL 5e and HP Postscript Level 2 emulation.
No, it happens because there is a line like this
*cupsFilter: "application/vnd.cups-raster 100 rastertogutenprint.5.0"
in the PPD file.
> > CUPS in Debian turns any input file into PDF, apart from a PDF file, of
> > course. A PostScript file is filtered first by pstopdf, then by
> > pdftopdf. A PDF file would only be filtered by pdftopdf. If the PPD file
> > tells CUPS the printer wants PostScript it uses pdftops. Otherwise,
> > there are other filters for converting the PDF coming from pdftopdf into
> > the printer specific language.
>
> The problem still remains: the PDF file is not able to be printed
> properly, it can be either because of a corrupted file (badly-crafted), a
> problem with the driver (that is not able to interpret the code of the
> file) an error in CUPS, a problem within the application used to display
> the file... to solve the problem we have to start discarding all these
> things.
The OP has a PCL error on one machine. It is legitimate to use a PPD
file producing PostScript to see if it resolves the problem. Converting
the input file to PostScript before sending it to CUPS is something
entirely different and of doubtful merit.
> > I wasn't concerned with speed as such but with your giving this as a
> > reason for saying '. . . no conversion is needed between the doc and the
> > printer' for a PS file.
>
> When you are using a PPD which defines the capabilities of the printer
> and how it has to behave and both (printer harwdare and printer driver)
> "speak" a standard language (like PostScript) you're reducing the chances
> for an error than when using any other emulated language such as PCL,
> simply because PS is not device-dependant, but PCL is, meaning -for the
> latter- that you completely rely on the printer's capablities and how your
> device interprets the job you are sending to it.
The standard language used for printing in Debian has been PDF for over
three years. There is no inherent benefit in inputting a PostScript file
to CUPS.
You are also confusing the input file with the file sent by a CUPS
backend to the printer. In the latter case, you reply completely on the
capabilities of the printer's interpreters whether the file contains
PostScript, PCL or any other language.
Reply to: