- WLUG - wlug.mailman3.com

Re: [Wlug] printers

by Frank

On Fri, Sep 03, 2004 at 05:26:53PM -0400, Keith Wright wrote: > > From: "Son Nguyen" <snguyen(a)hotmail.com> > > > > I would recommend not using LPRng. It is too old. > > As an old codger in training, I take that personally. > You remind me of Perlis's comment on Algol60: > Not perfect, but a big improvement over its successors. As a young whippersnapper out of training... "Heh, reminds me of the last time I ran into Algol60... Er, wait, no it doesn't." > I don't even know what LPRng is, I suppose it's the New-Gnu version > of the ancient bin/lpr program, from back in the days when programs > were more prized for working than for having a Web interface. 'Course we'll skip the fact that the reason things were prized for working back then was that the majority didn't... And the web interfaces are generally a sign of civilization moving from the 'How can we eat?' stage past the 'Why do we eat?' and straight to the 'Where shall we have lunch?' stage... (Did I mention that LPRng was started in 1986 and hit widespread use in '88 or so? (At least according to the LPRng website)) <SNIP> > I can print from the printer/Linux machine, but when I tried > to use the much-touted CUPS web-based set-up to connect to the > printer from another Linux machine, it went totaly wonky. > Certain buttons sent the browser in an apparent infinite loop. > (By Turing, you can never be sure, but I waited long with no action) > Sometimes it would take me to some crazy random place in the > Internet, to pictures of buildings that had the same name > as my server machine, as though some mad programmer had > rewritten bin/hostname to search Google for its name. You had some misconfiguration going on there probably... Your web browser had its auto-magical lookup functionality turned on and went looking for what you specified when it couldn't connect to the address you specified. <SNIP> > > You can configure it via console, applet, or even web. > > Not me, maybe you can. Honestly, CUPS is not that hard to configure and use these days. There was a period of history where it was pretty difficult to set up correctly but it has been pretty solid for the last couple of years. And, even in the difficult years, it offered a level of functionality not readily available with the rest of tools in play at the time. > > Fedora and Redhat has gone that route and I believe that > > others have too. It is much better than LPRng can every be. > > Oh, I suppose, but much better can you make something that > does what I used to with "cat scratch.ps >/dev/lp0"? > > -- Keith You mean, can I make it print gibberish on my non-PS PCL printer? But if that is all you need, then why bother with even old school lpr? On the other hand, if you want conversion to something your printer (whichever one you pick) will actually print, remote printing, printer pools, print job scheduling, and many other modern pieces of functionality... CUPS is probably something you want to look into... And I'd recommend it to the original poster. Frank (Typos and general icky-ness of the email I apologize for, had to recreate it from a bounce message as I discovered a bit of misconfiguration on my recently moved email server...)

Sept. 4, 2004

Re: [Wlug] printers

by Keith Wright

> From: "Son Nguyen" <snguyen(a)hotmail.com> > > I would recommend not using LPRng. It is too old. As an old codger in training, I take that personally. You remind me of Perlis's comment on Algol60: Not perfect, but a big improvement over its successors. I don't even know what LPRng is, I suppose it's the New-Gnu version of the ancient bin/lpr program, from back in the days when programs were more prized for working than for having a Web interface. My printer is attached to a dual boot machine that now runs Linux only, with a Samba server so that Diane can print via the network from her laptop. It worked pretty much the first time, the main problem being getting the Windows laptop to notice it. I can print from the printer/Linux machine, but when I tried to use the much-touted CUPS web-based set-up to connect to the printer from another Linux machine, it went totaly wonky. Certain buttons sent the browser in an apparent infinite loop. (By Turing, you can never be sure, but I waited long with no action) Sometimes it would take me to some crazy random place in the Internet, to pictures of buildings that had the same name as my server machine, as though some mad programmer had rewritten bin/hostname to search Google for its name. It was not high priority, since ftp works and I have to walk to the printer machine anyway to get the paper, so I quit. > I understand that CUPS seems difficult, but once you understand it, > it is the next best thing. At first I thought you were recommending it as second-best, but maybe "next best" means Best Real Soon Now. > In my office, I have setup my kickstart > to install 300+ printers on all of my Redhat Linux V3 Workstation > machines (100+). Eh? You need 300 printers for 100 workstations? > You can configure it via console, applet, or even web. Not me, maybe you can. > Fedora and Redhat has gone that route and I believe that > others have too. It is much better than LPRng can every be. Oh, I suppose, but much better can you make something that does what I used to with "cat scratch.ps >/dev/lp0"? -- Keith

Sept. 3, 2004

Re: [Wlug] printers

by Chuck Haines

LPRng is not that bad for a print server. In the ECE dept at WPI, we use LPRng beause CUPS IMHO is still rather buggy. We've tried switching over to CUPS on many occasions however have always ran into a bug that prevents us from performing the switch over. We've also used CUPS on our other servers to connet to the printer server running LPRng and have run into some troubles with that, which we have not using LPRng. Chuck On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 13:21:45 +0000, Son Nguyen <snguyen(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > Don, > > I would recommend not using LPRng. It is too old. I understand that CUPS > seems difficult, but once you understand it, it is the next best thing. In > my office, I have setup my kickstart to install 300+ printers on all of my > Redhat Linux V3 Workstation machines (100+). You can configure it via > console, applet, or even web. Fedora and Redhat has gone that route and I > believe that others have too. It is much better than LPRng can every be. > > Sonny > > >From: "Don Peterson" <dpeterson(a)sterilite.com> > >Reply-To: Worcester Linux Users Group <wlug(a)mail.wlug.org> > >To: "Worcester Linux Users Group" <wlug(a)mail.wlug.org> > >Subject: RE: [Wlug] printers > >Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2004 08:13:56 -0400 > > > >Thanx for the reply John. > >I had looked into CUPS but it looked pretty involved (the install and > >setup). > >Maybe I will give LPRng a shot. > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: wlug-bounces(a)mail.wlug.org [mailto:wlug-bounces@mail.wlug.org] On > >Behalf Of John Stoffel > >Sent: Wednesday, September 01, 2004 3:51 PM > >To: Worcester Linux Users Group > >Subject: Re: [Wlug] printers > > > > > >Don> I've got a quick question about printers. Is there a > printers.conf > > > >Don> file in Red Hat like there is in Solaris (I couldn't find one). > >Don> Here's my issue: > > > >Don> I have 5 servers in a 9i RAC array and I don't want to set up my > 50 > > > >Don> printers on each server. Can anyone suggest a way to > "copy" > >Don> the printers I set up on one server to the other 4? > > > >Sure, just setup one box as your master, using LPRng. Then you install > >LPRng on all the client systems with an /etc/printcap sorta like this: > > > > # LPRng: /etc/printcap file > > # > > # Forward all jobs to the print server > > # > > *:force_localhost@:client:rm=printmaster.foo.com > > > > > >Then when you add/delete printers on the server, they appear on the > >client without any intervention. > > > >Now, I can't say I love LPRng, mostly because the Docs are baroque and > >hard to follow, and the output of various commands is also archane. > > > >You might want to look at using CUPS instead, since it's based on and > >support the Internet Printing Protocol. I use CUPS at home and it's > >fine. > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Wlug mailing list > >Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org > >http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Wlug mailing list > >Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org > >http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wlug mailing list > Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org > http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug > -- Chuck Haines chaines(a)gmail.com ------------------------------------------- Tau Kappa Epsilon Fraternity WPI Class of 2005 ------------------------------------------- AIM: CyberGrex YIM: CyberGrex_27 ICQ: 3707881 -------------------------------------------

Sept. 3, 2004

RE: [Wlug] printers

by Son Nguyen

Don, I would recommend not using LPRng. It is too old. I understand that CUPS seems difficult, but once you understand it, it is the next best thing. In my office, I have setup my kickstart to install 300+ printers on all of my Redhat Linux V3 Workstation machines (100+). You can configure it via console, applet, or even web. Fedora and Redhat has gone that route and I believe that others have too. It is much better than LPRng can every be. Sonny >From: "Don Peterson" <dpeterson(a)sterilite.com> >Reply-To: Worcester Linux Users Group <wlug(a)mail.wlug.org> >To: "Worcester Linux Users Group" <wlug(a)mail.wlug.org> >Subject: RE: [Wlug] printers >Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2004 08:13:56 -0400 > >Thanx for the reply John. >I had looked into CUPS but it looked pretty involved (the install and >setup). >Maybe I will give LPRng a shot. > >-----Original Message----- >From: wlug-bounces(a)mail.wlug.org [mailto:wlug-bounces@mail.wlug.org] On >Behalf Of John Stoffel >Sent: Wednesday, September 01, 2004 3:51 PM >To: Worcester Linux Users Group >Subject: Re: [Wlug] printers > > >Don> I've got a quick question about printers. Is there a printers.conf > >Don> file in Red Hat like there is in Solaris (I couldn't find one). >Don> Here's my issue: > >Don> I have 5 servers in a 9i RAC array and I don't want to set up my 50 > >Don> printers on each server. Can anyone suggest a way to "copy" >Don> the printers I set up on one server to the other 4? > >Sure, just setup one box as your master, using LPRng. Then you install >LPRng on all the client systems with an /etc/printcap sorta like this: > > # LPRng: /etc/printcap file > # > # Forward all jobs to the print server > # > *:force_localhost@:client:rm=printmaster.foo.com > > >Then when you add/delete printers on the server, they appear on the >client without any intervention. > >Now, I can't say I love LPRng, mostly because the Docs are baroque and >hard to follow, and the output of various commands is also archane. > >You might want to look at using CUPS instead, since it's based on and >support the Internet Printing Protocol. I use CUPS at home and it's >fine. > >_______________________________________________ >Wlug mailing list >Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org >http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug > >_______________________________________________ >Wlug mailing list >Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org >http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug

Sept. 3, 2004

RE: [Wlug] printers

by John Stoffel

Don> Thanx for the reply John. No problem, always glad to help out when I can. Don> I had looked into CUPS but it looked pretty involved (the install Don> and setup). Maybe I will give LPRng a shot. I think you should keep looking at CUPS, I've found it easier to setup and use when compared to LPRng. Patrick is a good guy, but I'm just not happy with LPRng docs. John

Sept. 2, 2004

RE: [Wlug] printers

by Don Peterson

Thanx for the reply John. I had looked into CUPS but it looked pretty involved (the install and setup). Maybe I will give LPRng a shot. -----Original Message----- From: wlug-bounces(a)mail.wlug.org [mailto:wlug-bounces@mail.wlug.org] On Behalf Of John Stoffel Sent: Wednesday, September 01, 2004 3:51 PM To: Worcester Linux Users Group Subject: Re: [Wlug] printers Don> I've got a quick question about printers. Is there a printers.conf Don> file in Red Hat like there is in Solaris (I couldn't find one). Don> Here's my issue: Don> I have 5 servers in a 9i RAC array and I don't want to set up my 50 Don> printers on each server. Can anyone suggest a way to "copy" Don> the printers I set up on one server to the other 4? Sure, just setup one box as your master, using LPRng. Then you install LPRng on all the client systems with an /etc/printcap sorta like this: # LPRng: /etc/printcap file # # Forward all jobs to the print server # *:force_localhost@:client:rm=printmaster.foo.com Then when you add/delete printers on the server, they appear on the client without any intervention. Now, I can't say I love LPRng, mostly because the Docs are baroque and hard to follow, and the output of various commands is also archane. You might want to look at using CUPS instead, since it's based on and support the Internet Printing Protocol. I use CUPS at home and it's fine. _______________________________________________ Wlug mailing list Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug

Sept. 2, 2004

Re: [Wlug] Linux Photo Printer recommendations

by Robert L Krawitz

Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2004 14:16:19 -0400 From: "John Stoffel" <stoffel(a)lucent.com> >>>>> "Robert" == Robert L Krawitz <rlk(a)alum.mit.edu> writes: Robert, thank you for your *very* informative post! Robert> For Linux use, I would recommend the 2200 over the 960 hands Robert> down, if you can use Gimp-Print 5.0 (which is currently in Robert> beta). I have both of them. I consider myself qualified on Robert> this subject, as the Gimp-Print project lead. I'm very happy to use cutting edge software, I run a very upto date Debian setup. You'll have to build from source; the Debian packaging for 5.0 beta is currently broken. Robert> These printers are not the same; the 2200 uses UltraChrome Robert> inks (which are pigment-based) while the 960 uses Robert> conventional dye-based inks. Somewhat surprisingly, the Robert> 2200 has a wider gamut than the 960 (usually pigment inks Robert> have narrow gamut). However, it's not hard to get a good Robert> grayscale out of that printer. What other printers use these UltraChrome inks as well, which are (possibly) cheaper than the 2200? I don't think I need the bigger size, I'm mostly looking for a dedicated photo printer for home use, we already have the B&W laser for generic printing. I'm not even planning on using this new printer for color text prints. The only one that's cheaper is the R800, but that's currently marginally supported at best. In particular, it only operates in CMYK mode right now, and it's going to take me a while to get the red and blue inks (and gloss optimizer) working correctly. Robert> The 960, despite its tiny smallest drop size of 2 pl (vs. 4 pl Robert> for the 2200) does not produce as good output in my opinion. Robert> You really need to use the highest resolution (2880x1440) to Robert> get smooth texture, since printing with the 960 requires use Robert> of a lot of black ink. The 2200 has a "light black" (gray) Robert> ink that helps a lot, and in my experience you can get quite Robert> good quality even at 720 DPI and seldom need to go above Robert> 1440x720 DPI. There's a big performance difference right Robert> there! Sounds like a big difference in costs too, since you'll be using less ink. How important is the paper? Everything I've been reading says that using the Epson paper is really the only way to go. You're not using less ink at lower resolution. Paper is very important. I'd suggest the Epson papers, since the inks and papers are designed to work together. -- Robert Krawitz <rlk(a)alum.mit.edu> Tall Clubs International -- http://www.tall.org/ or 1-888-IM-TALL-2 Member of the League for Programming Freedom -- mail lpf(a)uunet.uu.net Project lead for Gimp Print -- http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net "Linux doesn't dictate how I work, I dictate how Linux works." --Eric Crampton

Sept. 1, 2004

Re: [Wlug] printers

by John Stoffel

Don> I've got a quick question about printers. Is there a Don> printers.conf file in Red Hat like there is in Solaris (I Don> couldn't find one). Here's my issue: Don> I have 5 servers in a 9i RAC array and I don't want to set up my Don> 50 printers on each server. Can anyone suggest a way to "copy" Don> the printers I set up on one server to the other 4? Sure, just setup one box as your master, using LPRng. Then you install LPRng on all the client systems with an /etc/printcap sorta like this: # LPRng: /etc/printcap file # # Forward all jobs to the print server # *:force_localhost@:client:rm=printmaster.foo.com Then when you add/delete printers on the server, they appear on the client without any intervention. Now, I can't say I love LPRng, mostly because the Docs are baroque and hard to follow, and the output of various commands is also archane. You might want to look at using CUPS instead, since it's based on and support the Internet Printing Protocol. I use CUPS at home and it's fine.

Sept. 1, 2004

printers

by Don Peterson

Hello there, I am new here, and new to Linux. My company is in the middle of a platform migration for our Oracle ERP system. We are moving away from Solaris towards a Intel/Linux solution. I've got a quick question about printers. Is there a printers.conf file in Red Hat like there is in Solaris (I couldn't find one). Here's my issue: I have 5 servers in a 9i RAC array and I don't want to set up my 50 printers on each server. Can anyone suggest a way to "copy" the printers I set up on one server to the other 4? Any help would be greatly appreciated. Don Peterson MCP/DCSE Network/Telecommunications Administrator Sterilite Corporation 30 Scales Lane Townsend, Ma 01469

Sept. 1, 2004

Re: [Wlug] Linux Photo Printer recommendations

by John Stoffel

>>>>> "Robert" == Robert L Krawitz <rlk(a)alum.mit.edu> writes: Robert, thank you for your *very* informative post! Robert> For Linux use, I would recommend the 2200 over the 960 hands Robert> down, if you can use Gimp-Print 5.0 (which is currently in Robert> beta). I have both of them. I consider myself qualified on Robert> this subject, as the Gimp-Print project lead. I'm very happy to use cutting edge software, I run a very upto date Debian setup. Robert> These printers are not the same; the 2200 uses UltraChrome Robert> inks (which are pigment-based) while the 960 uses conventional Robert> dye-based inks. Somewhat surprisingly, the 2200 has a wider Robert> gamut than the 960 (usually pigment inks have narrow gamut). Robert> However, it's not hard to get a good grayscale out of that Robert> printer. What other printers use these UltraChrome inks as well, which are (possibly) cheaper than the 2200? I don't think I need the bigger size, I'm mostly looking for a dedicated photo printer for home use, we already have the B&W laser for generic printing. I'm not even planning on using this new printer for color text prints. Robert> The 960, despite its tiny smallest drop size of 2 pl (vs. 4 pl Robert> for the 2200) does not produce as good output in my opinion. Robert> You really need to use the highest resolution (2880x1440) to Robert> get smooth texture, since printing with the 960 requires use Robert> of a lot of black ink. The 2200 has a "light black" (gray) Robert> ink that helps a lot, and in my experience you can get quite Robert> good quality even at 720 DPI and seldom need to go above Robert> 1440x720 DPI. There's a big performance difference right Robert> there! Sounds like a big difference in costs too, since you'll be using less ink. How important is the paper? Everything I've been reading says that using the Epson paper is really the only way to go. Robert> The problem with the 2200 is that Gimp-Print 4.2 doesn't drive it Robert> well, since the internal architecture doesn't cope very well with the Robert> fact that the gray (and photo black) inks aren't neutral. If you Robert> really can't switch to Gimp-Print 5.0 yet, the 2200 isn't a good Robert> choice; I'd recommend the R200 or the like. How about the R800? Is that the least expensive of the printers with the UltraChrome inks? Thanks for your comments, a big help! John

Sept. 1, 2004