Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 11 Nov 2007 01:15:12 +0100
From:      Roland Smith <rsmith@xs4all.nl>
To:        Predrag Punosevac <punosevac@math.arizona.edu>
Cc:        questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: PPD files vs printer drivers also LPD vs LPRng vs CUPS
Message-ID:  <20071111001512.GA32312@slackbox.xs4all.nl>
In-Reply-To: <47364131.5030405@math.arizona.edu>
References:  <47364131.5030405@math.arizona.edu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--HcAYCG3uE/tztfnV
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sat, Nov 10, 2007 at 04:39:29PM -0700, Predrag Punosevac wrote:
> I am trying to understand little bit better Unix printing. I am terribly=
=20
> confused about
> the real meaning of PPD files and printer drivers.
>=20
> According to this=20
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PostScript_Printer_Description
>=20
> PPD files are post script description files that act as a drivers for pos=
t=20
> script printers. This seems clear to me but I have never had a post
> script printer in my life.

They are not really drivers but more files that describe the
capabilities of the printer.
=20
> According to same page CUPS-PPD are used by CUPS to do post-script printi=
ng=20
> on non-postscript printers by directing files through
> CUPS-filter. Could somebody explain this things better to me. Every time =
I=20
> used CUPS the PPD files where enough to enable me printing.
> Did I really use some other drivers beside these PPD files or did CUPS=20
> communicate with my printers with some generic driver and just
> uses PPD files to do filtering.

The latter. Cups uses the ghostscript program to translate postscript
into something that the non-postscript printer can understand.
=20
> What is the simplest way to send ps file to the printer that doesn't spea=
k=20
> ps? If I could do that everything else is peace of cake. I read very=20
> carefully printing form the handbook but I want to learn more.

Use ghostscript. This is what both apsfilter and cups do. They've just
made it a lot easier than doing it yourself. And as you can see from the
size of both cups and apsfilter 'everything else' is a substantial piece
of cake.

> Could anybody explain me if there are some strong reasons for choosing LP=
D=20
> over CUPS or LPRng system (seems just GUI added on the top of LPD)
> It would logical to me that LPD is safer (CUPS port has some security=20
> warnings) and maybe more reliable. In any case it is included in the base=
=20
> system and I prefer to use something included in the base system

In the past, lpd had a lot of security issues as well. I'm not sure if
they're all solved.

Both apsfilter and cups do more than standard lpd, which is only a
printer spooler. Both cups and apsfilter look at what you're trying to
print and try to convert it to a form suitable for printing. Standard
lpr only understands a couple of ancient formats (ditroff, dvi, cif,
plot) next to plain text.

Roland
--=20
R.F.Smith                                   http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/
[plain text _non-HTML_ PGP/GnuPG encrypted/signed email much appreciated]
pgp: 1A2B 477F 9970 BA3C 2914  B7CE 1277 EFB0 C321 A725 (KeyID: C321A725)

--HcAYCG3uE/tztfnV
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFHNkmQEnfvsMMhpyURAtLMAJ96G/DgzkiVcj3xaeBqrm+J8gEpMwCghYQ2
fChDNAW6L6porKyNRu0WbDE=
=TIJJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--HcAYCG3uE/tztfnV--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20071111001512.GA32312>