More PPDs for HP printers?
Hans Werner Strube
such as 1600 or 2250. For 1600, I use HP1200C.PS, which is not optimal.
For 2250, I now copied the Windows9x PPD and changed Xpdefaults or
psprint.conf, respectively. This seems to work well in SO 6.0, whereas
SO 5.2 core dumps on printing.
Are there any more recent PPDs or hints to adapt third-party ones?
(BTW, when printing to a file, SO 5.2 output may be about 10 times larger
than SO 6.0 output for the same document; also SO 5.2 may take *very* long
time.)
--
Hans Werner Strube str...@physik3.gwdg.XPAM.de (remove .XPAM)
Drittes Physikalisches Institut, Univ. Goettingen
Buergerstr. 42-44, 37073 Goettingen, Germany
James Lee
HP printers?:
> Neither SO 5.2 nor 6.0 (Solaris) have the PPDs for more recent HP
printers,
> such as 1600 or 2250. For 1600, I use HP1200C.PS, which is not optimal.
> For 2250, I now copied the Windows9x PPD and changed Xpdefaults or
> psprint.conf, respectively. This seems to work well in SO 6.0, whereas
> SO 5.2 core dumps on printing.
> Are there any more recent PPDs or hints to adapt third-party ones?
Have you tried HP?
If you can't get it individually there is most likely the PPD file as
part of one of the other OS's driver bundles. I was fooled by this by
Canon, the PPD file was not available separately but only with a W*nd*ws
driver.
In what way is the PPD not optimal? The extra features are mainly for
things like duplexing the actual print shouldn't be any different. You
might ne better of with the generic PPD as then t won't enforce things
like resolution which (I think) is best left for the printer to do as it
is set.
As to making it work with SO5.2 and core dumping, I'm not sure.
> (BTW, when printing to a file, SO 5.2 output may be about 10 times larger
> than SO 6.0 output for the same document; also SO 5.2 may take *very*
long
> time.)
The PostScript print routines in both 5.2 and 6 are weak, output size was
not an issue for them. The 5.2 output positions each char as a hex
encoded string so is 4 bytes, only the not 7 bit ASCIIs need the hex,
then with 1 byte of unneeded white space, a position in floating point,
the '.' being extra as integer position can be used if scaled correctly
and finally as most text is at the same vertical position as the
previous character there is no need to repeat the second co-ordinate.
e.g. this:
<48> 38.64 49.68 C
<65> 47.28 49.68 C
<6c> 52.56 49.68 C
<6c> 55.92 49.68 C
<6f> 59.28 49.68 C
could be:
(h)3864 4968 C
(e)4728 c
(l)5256 c
(l)5592 c
(e)5928 c
And if the kerning is not tweaked:
(hello)3864 4968 C
Just shut your eyes and rejoice that marks appear on the paper! Or
convert to PDF, the ask acroread to convert back to PostScript.
Hans Werner Strube
> On 27/03/03, 17:13:55, (Hans Werner Strube) wrote regarding More PPDs for
> HP printers?:
>
>> Neither SO 5.2 nor 6.0 (Solaris) have the PPDs for more recent HP
> printers,
>> such as 1600 or 2250. For 1600, I use HP1200C.PS, which is not optimal.
>> For 2250, I now copied the Windows9x PPD and changed Xpdefaults or
>> psprint.conf, respectively. This seems to work well in SO 6.0, whereas
>> SO 5.2 core dumps on printing.
>> Are there any more recent PPDs or hints to adapt third-party ones?
...
> As to making it work with SO5.2 and core dumping, I'm not sure.
This was some installation error of mine. It now works for the 2250
with SO 5.2, too.
Thanks for the hints.