From owner-freebsd-arch Fri Jun 30 19:27:34 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from picnic.mat.net (picnic.mat.net [206.246.122.133]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB7A737B59F for ; Fri, 30 Jun 2000 19:27:30 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from chuckr@picnic.mat.net) Received: from localhost (chuckr@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by picnic.mat.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA91799; Fri, 30 Jun 2000 22:27:06 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from chuckr@picnic.mat.net) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 22:27:06 -0400 (EDT) From: Chuck Robey To: Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group Cc: Garance A Drosihn , Will Andrews , papowell@astart.com, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: was: Bringing LPRng into FreeBSD? In-Reply-To: <200006301307.e5UD7pu07184@cwsys.cwsent.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Fri, 30 Jun 2000, Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group wrote: > > I'm a bit spaced out right now, but offhand I don't see why > > ghostscript would be needed for converting anything (except > > PDF) into postscript. I suspect apsfilter only uses it for > > printing postscript jobs on non-postscript printers, or for > > doing clever manipulation of postscript (for page-counting, > > perhaps). I would be inclined to use something like netpbm > > to get GIF images INTO postscript. Not ghostscript. > > > > [this says nothing about how much stuff lprng or apsfilter > > brings in, of course. I'm just not sure why one would fire > > up ghostscript to print gif images...] > > For some printers you'll need ghostscript. I for example have an Epson > printer which uses a proprietary Epson language called ESC/2. > Apsfilter uses ghostscript to convert postscript or anything else for > that matter into ESC/2 so my printer can print it. For Windows, Epson > distributes a driver that performs, in the loosest terms, the same > function as ghostscript. OK, if that's true, then the comments about apsfilter being such a huge hog as compared to LPRng are totally incorrect (and in fact the situation is in fact the reverse of what was said). Apsfilter + our present lpd would be a lot smaller. Could anyone proposing LPRng please state the improvements that LPRng provides over lpd + apsfilter? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Chuck Robey | Interests include C & Java programming, FreeBSD, chuckr@picnic.mat.net | electronics, communications, and signal processing. New Year's Resolution: I will not sphroxify gullible people into looking up fictitious words in the dictionary. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message