From owner-freebsd-questions Wed Jan 14 05:45:47 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA23038 for questions-outgoing; Wed, 14 Jan 1998 05:45:47 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from euthyphro.uchicago.edu (euthyphro.uchicago.edu [128.135.21.31]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id FAA23027 for ; Wed, 14 Jan 1998 05:45:22 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sfarrell@phaedrus.uchicago.edu) Received: from phaedrus.uchicago.edu (phaedrus [128.135.21.10]) by euthyphro.uchicago.edu (8.8.6/8.8.4) with ESMTP id HAA05725; Wed, 14 Jan 1998 07:45:20 -0600 (CST) Received: (from sfarrell@localhost) by phaedrus.uchicago.edu (8.8.7/8.8.5) id HAA18247; Wed, 14 Jan 1998 07:45:19 -0600 (CST) To: John Kenagy Cc: questions freebsd Subject: Re: printing from emacs References: From: stephen farrell Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.108) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Date: 14 Jan 1998 07:45:18 -0600 In-Reply-To: John Kenagy's message of "Tue, 13 Jan 1998 21:38:24 -0600 (CST)" Message-ID: <87hg77f9u9.fsf@phaedrus.uchicago.edu> Lines: 27 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.5/XEmacs 20.3 - "Vatican City" Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk John Kenagy writes: > I give up! > > It seems so simple, or should be. I can print with the spooler (lpr) > just fine from the shell, within emacs from dired operations menu, > postscript print the buffer, but *not* just "print buffer". > > That is the simple lpr buffer from the tools menu. I can set lpr > switches , etc. but nothing happens when I print the buffer. > I mean nothing. > > Any ideas where to look? What version of emacs (or xemacs) are you using? Can you print any file from the shell with lpr, or only postscript ones? Under xemacs, the "print buffer" calls lpr-buffer (which I assume is similar to print-buffer, but might be slightly different)--what function does yours call? (you should be able to do C-h k and then pull down the menu to get the function name, unless that's an xemacsism and you're using fsf emacs...) Why do you want to do that anyway? -- Steve Farrell