Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 00:23:27 -0400 From: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> To: Chuck Robey <chuckr@picnic.mat.net>, Will Andrews <andrews@technologist.com> Cc: papowell@astart.com, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: was: Bringing LPRng into FreeBSD? Message-ID: <v0421012fb581cfdf2938@[128.113.24.47]> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0006282101000.590-100000@picnic.mat.net> References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0006282101000.590-100000@picnic.mat.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 9:04 PM -0400 6/28/00, Chuck Robey wrote: >On Wed, 28 Jun 2000, Will Andrews wrote: > > > On Tue, Jun 27, 2000 at 02:41:27AM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: > > > Erm, then why not do this with apsfilter? > > > > Because apsfilter also brings in far more useless junk that > > LPRng does. 26,000 lines over our current lpr == LPRng. > > apsfilter == LPRng + lots and lots and lots of other crap. > >I'm curious about that. How does LPRng get gif to postscript >conversion without ghostscript (one of the biggest pieces of >"crap" you refer to). How does it get ascii (or any other >format) to postscript? 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...] --- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@eclipse.acs.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or drosih@rpi.edu Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?v0421012fb581cfdf2938>