On Sunday 06 January 2019 11:28:55 David Wright wrote:
> On Sun 06 Jan 2019 at 10:37:48 (-0500), Gene Heskett wrote:
> > On Sunday 06 January 2019 10:17:16 Brian wrote:
> > > On Sun 06 Jan 2019 at 14:42:08 +0100, deloptes wrote:
> > > > Curt wrote:
> > > > > I suppose you could argue that the percentage of Firefox users
> > > > > too lazy or bewildered to try another browser is good enough
> > > > > for stackexchange, because, goddammit, you take what you can
> > > > > get.
> > > >
> > > > Please be nice - I am not lazy - I have Chromium, but I do not
> > > > want to use it. I like FF more and I can not accept the argument
> > > > regarding 1 page printing in FF, because other sites do not have
> > > > the problem, hence it is doable to overcome the issue from
> > > > within the site (perhaps css definitions - I do not know what
> > > > exactly the issue is and I do not care). If site developers may
> > > > embed 100s of lines of code to check browser and version and can
> > > > adapt their sites to IE,FF and Chromium the least, they could
> > > > also take care of this "feature", so lazy is not me, but the one
> > > > that does not care, test or provide proper support for printing
> > > > from within FF. This is my opinion only, you may accept or
> > > > not... and I agree with Gene - stackexchange is phony in their
> > > > philosophy, but it is their right to be so and my right to
> > > > qualify it as such. OF course you have the right to have a
> > > > different opinion and I respect this.
> > >
> > > Strictly speaking, the problem does not arise due a problem in the
> > > printing system. Firefox produces a PDF before dispatching it for
> > > printing and that PDF is not a true representation of the web
> > > page.
> > >
> > > Whether the issue is tackled by Firefox or at the stackexchange
> > > end is immaterial; this will take time. Meanwhile, there is an
> > > elderly user who had hoped to read and absorb the material today
> > > while eating his free lunch.
> > >
> > > Maybe he would like to use SHIFT+F2 with Firefox (I have Quantum)
> > > and take a screenshot of the whole page.
> >
> > Two questions then, Brian: Where in the FF menu's does one find this
> > magic key combo documented?
>
> I was under the impression that taking screenshots was under the
> control of the window manager, so the key combinations might be quite
> different for other users.
>
> For example, my fvwm uses Shift-F2 for speaker-volume-down because the
> Lenovo-W10 system chose to engrave {Speaker]- on the key.
>
> But if FF can take a screenshot itself, I would hope that you get
> the whole page, not just the whole window (which is all the WM can
> give you, of course) because configuring an application like scrot
> can give you *much* more functionality.
>
So I installed scrot. But I don't see anything in its man page resembling
the --fullpage option. So I'll have to play I guess.
> > > screenshot filename.png --fullpage
Humm:
gene@coyote:~/linuxcnc/nc_files$ sudo apt-get install screenshot
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
E: Unable to locate package screenshot
gene@coyote:~/linuxcnc/nc_files$
I do have ksnapshot though, and it works well for what I've needed to,
but I don't think it has the --fullpage option.
> > And pray tell, where does it stash this .png? FF it seems, goes out
> > of their way to select where it stashes a downloadable file. Its
> > instructed to ask me, but rarely does.
>
> # find / -type f -mmin -10
>
> for files created in the last 10 minutes, say.
>
> > > Use TAB to complete and move along the command line. The file
> > > produced is named filename-fullpage.png and is, of course,
> > > printable.
> >
> > Good to know.
>
> Yes, but some of the advice given seems to come with a lot of
> attitude.
Yes, there is that at times, but if one can't stand the heat, he really
ought to stay out of the kitchen.
I try to remember to say thank you to those supplying good information.
> Cheers,
> David.
Thank you David.
Cheers, Gene Heskett
--
