Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 08 Feb 2012 17:55:37 +1000
From:      Da Rock <>
Subject:   Re: Debug Brother MFC-9560CDW failure to print
Message-ID:  <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References:  <> <> <>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
On 02/08/12 17:37, Da Rock wrote:
> On 02/08/12 17:30, Da Rock wrote:
>> On 02/08/12 17:24, Robert Bonomi wrote:
>>>> Cc:
>>>> Subject: Re: Debug Brother MFC-9560CDW failure to print
>>>> On 02/08/12 03:33, Jerry wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 07 Feb 2012 11:57:26 +1000
>>>>> Da Rock articulated:
>>>>>> Just noticed something: have you specifically got a postscript 
>>>>>> module
>>>>>> in your printer? Because that is what it is sending your printer...
>>>>>> I only just found that in the logs :)
>>>>> I have used every PPD file I could find; both those supplied by CUPS
>>>>> and those found on the NET. It doesn't make any difference. I can 
>>>>> only
>>>>> get a page printed if I use the LPR option, otherwise only a blank 
>>>>> page
>>>>> is ejected. By the way, if I use a B&W PPD instead of the color laser
>>>>> one, a B&W document is printed when I use the LPR option; 
>>>>> therefore, it
>>>>> is apparent that something is actually using that PPD.
>>>>> If you search, you will find that there are numerous reports of
>>>>> problems with blank pages and the CUPS 1.5.0 version. Those that I 
>>>>> have
>>>>> personally checked are usually also associated with FreeBSD, which
>>>>> leads me to believe it is a local phenomenon. Luckily, I can print
>>>>> through Windows, so I am not stuck with this BS.
>>>>> By the way, the test page printed is the one that is supplied with 
>>>>> CUPS.
>>>>> Interestingly, it prints its own page but not one feed to it. Go
>>>>> figure ...
>>>>    From what I see right now, you're printing ps to a non ps 
>>>> printer. So
>>>> I'm a little surprised that you get a test page that way.
>>> Strange.  When I check the specs for that printer, it says it it has
>>> following printer-language support: "PCL6,BR-Script3"
>>> "BR-Script3" Is Brother's implementation of PostScript -- thus not 
>>> having
>>> to py Adobe's licensing fees for the "genuine" interpreter.
>> Interesting. I haven't heard that before. That said, it would take 
>> more than a simple name change to beat off the blood-sucking 
>> lawyers... so just how close to postscript is it? And how perfectly 
>> does cups interpret it as well?
> A quick glance at wikipedia doesn't show the 9560 as compatible to ps 
> 2 or 3
Excuse me, yet again.

I remember now, (it's been close to ten years since I worked on these 
monsters) that used to be a "selling" feature; not really a feature 
technically :) I think some of the earliest models used to have a 
genuine interpreter built-in. Maybe it was too expensive to sell?

I don't know exactly in what direction it has gone now, but it appears 
not all are compatible.

Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <>