From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Aug 3 19:01:31 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24D951065670 for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 19:01:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bonomi@mail.r-bonomi.com) Received: from mail.r-bonomi.com (mx-out.r-bonomi.com [204.87.227.120]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD9DC8FC08 for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 19:01:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: (from bonomi@localhost) by mail.r-bonomi.com (8.14.4/rdb1) id p73J1ofu046001 for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 14:01:50 -0500 (CDT) Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2011 14:01:50 -0500 (CDT) From: Robert Bonomi Message-Id: <201108031901.p73J1ofu046001@mail.r-bonomi.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: Subject: top-posting 'condescending asshats' (to use Ryan Coleman's description of himself) X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2011 19:01:31 -0000 > Subject: Re: printing to Kyocera FS-1030D > From: Ryan Coleman > Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2011 13:22:51 -0500 > > Screw off. I'd suggest that you "take your own advice', except for the fact that you probably don't know *how*. > Top posting is actually a default in the mail software > community. FALSE TO FACT. "top posting" was _universally_ frowned upon in the early days of email. It became 'common', albeit *NOT* preferred/desirable, when Microsoft introduced that botch in _their_ e-mail client, and the vast majority of their users "didn't know any better." There are sound 'human factors' reasons why bottom-posting is preferable in most situations. *ANY* situation where the elapsed time between messages is longer than the recipient's ability to retain the 'frame of reference' (i.e., the previous message) in memory, it _is_ harder for the recipient of the message to follow top-posted content than interleaved/bottom-posted. They _do_ have to scan back-and-forth to find out (first) _what_ is being talked about,and (then) what the response is. Top posting _can_ be appropriate in situations where it is *KNOWN* that eall_ parties will receive, and _read_, the 'reply' in a 'near-immediate' time-frame relative to when the original was sent. Those who fail to recognize this inherent _FACT_ of all 'non-local' store-and-forward communications systems -- where the sender has _NO_ idea of 'how soon' the recipient will read the message, or what they may have been doing in the mean time -- *are* being 'inconsiderate' to their readers. Those who _insist_ on doing it, despite attempts at education, are *arrogant*, inconsiderate, ignoramuses. > And I will always do it. No doubt. Marking you as an arrogant, and *deliberately* inconsiderate, asshat. > More annoying: Extra spaces and not removing the cruff from the bottom of > emails. And condescending asshats. I see you believe in the double-standard of "do as I say, not as I do" given that you left in over 60 lines of material that was entirely irrelevant to your empty-headed posturing. Note: The _entire_ prior conent is left intact here, to expressly document the truth of the above statement. > > On Aug 3, 2011, at 1:08 PM, Robert Bonomi wrote: > > > > > Pierre, please do not 'top post' replies -- it makes the 'logic' of the > > message hard to follow, to wit: > > > > A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. > > > > > > > > Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? > > > > > > > > A: Top-posting. > > > > > > > > Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? > > > > > > > > > > See also _RFC 1855_ for the closest thing to an 'official' stance on > > the matter. > > > > > >> Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2011 13:10:03 -0400 From: Pierre-Luc Drouin > >> To: Chris Whitehouse Cc: > >> User Questions Subject: Re: printing > >> to Kyocera FS-1030D > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> I would install CUPS and use the PPD file recommended on > >> openprinting.org > >> (http://www.openprinting.org/printer/Kyocera/Kyocera-FS-1030D). > > > > This is -guaranteed- to be *ineffective*. > > > > Apparently you missed the mention in the OP's original message that the > > printer is running in 'PCL' emulation mode, and that he _cannot_ change > > that. > > > >> Cheers, Pierre-Luc > >> > >> On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 12:41 PM, Chris Whitehouse > >> wrote: > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> before I use up too many trees experimenting, could some kind soul > >>> tell me how I can get OpenOffice to print to this printer. This is > >>> the first time I have tried to get anything printed from FreeBSD. > >>> > >>> I'm following the handbook. I think the basic setup is ok, I can get > >>> text printed using eg > >>> # lptest 20 5 | lpr -Plp > >>> > >>> If I try to print the postscript program given in the handbook > >>> %!PS > >>> 100 100 moveto 300 300 lineto stroke > >>> 310 310 moveto /Helvetica findfont 12 scalefont setfont > >>> (Is this thing working?) show > >>> showpage > >>> > >>> # cat |lpr -Plp > >>> > >>> I get the whole text of the file not just "Is this thing working?". > >>> > >>> The printer has various emulations, it is set to PCL 6 and I can't > >>> change it > >>> (not my printer) > >>> > >>> Printing from OpenOffice just produces screeds of garbage, starting > >>> with %!PS so I presume the text of the postscript that OO has > >>> produced. > >>> > >>> The bit I'm stuck on is in section 9.4.1.3 Simulating PostScript on > >>> Non PostScript Printers (which I presume is what I need), > >>> specifically setting the device. gs -h doesn't show this printer or > >>> any Kyocera printer. So either what should I set Device to, or how do > >>> I get ghostscript to know about this printer? > >>> > >>> I'm using 8.1-RELEASE, openoffice.org-3.2.1, ghostscript8-8.71_6 > >>> > >>> thanks > >>> > >>> Chris >