[Bug 998087] Re: printer ERROR: invalidaccess OFFENDING COMMAND: filter
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 978120 *** https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/978120 Hi Christian, So, my impression, from what you've described is that this isn't the same issue as the others in this bug (not least because the Postscript error is different: "typecheck" rather than "invalidaccess". It *looks* to me like this is an problem with pstops, or an incompatibility between the way pstops manipulates its input and how the Ghostscript/ps2write output works. Can I suggest you open a new bug? And (if you can) make sure I'm subscribed to it (or post a link to the new bug here). On the new bug, if you could attach (ideally) three files: the input to Ghostscript, the output from Ghostscript and the output from pstops. Also, include the command lines you have listed above. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/998087 Title: printer ERROR: invalidaccess OFFENDING COMMAND: filter To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/998087/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1871377] Re: URW Nimbus font issue
We've had an update from URW++ and the glyph in question looks much better to me, but not being a speaker/reader of any language(s) that use that glyph, it would be great if the OP would be willing to check the update before I commit and push it to our github repo (then Till can pick it up for inclusion in a Ubuntu update). The font files (and metrics) here: https://ghostscript.com/~chrisl/afii10084-glyph-bug/ Thanks! -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1871377 Title: URW Nimbus font issue To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fonts-urw-base35/+bug/1871377/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1871377] Re: URW Nimbus font issue
I should note, these will be the "upstream" source repositories, not the Ubuntu ones (that will take a bit longer). -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1871377 Title: URW Nimbus font issue To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fonts-urw-base35/+bug/1871377/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1871377] Re: URW Nimbus font issue
Super, thank you. I'll update the relevant repositories later today. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1871377 Title: URW Nimbus font issue To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fonts-urw-base35/+bug/1871377/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1871377] Re: URW Nimbus font issue
I've pushed the fixes fonts to: https://github.com/ArtifexSoftware/urw- base35-fonts/commit/c15105598aa7eb256b1ebfcecd3d078801521e73 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1871377 Title: URW Nimbus font issue To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fonts-urw-base35/+bug/1871377/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1263415] Re: Kyocera FS-1100D cannot print Google Maps - limitcheck --image--
Sorry, but the file attached above (GoogleMapsPrintout.ps) appears to be a direct export from Opera (the metadata has: "%%Creator: Opera"), rather than the Postscript captured as detailed here: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DebuggingPrintingProblems#Getting_the_data_which_would_go_to_the_printer -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1263415 Title: Kyocera FS-1100D cannot print Google Maps - limitcheck --image-- To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/1263415/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1263415] Re: Kyocera FS-1100D cannot print Google Maps - limitcheck --image--
Okay, that's what we need to see, thanks. However, that Postscript comes from Opera, not from Ghostscript, so I'm not really the upstream contact. As far as I can tell, that's valid Postscript, so the problem is a bug in the printer - it should really be reported to Kyocera. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1263415 Title: Kyocera FS-1100D cannot print Google Maps - limitcheck --image-- To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/1263415/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1263415] Re: Kyocera FS-1100D cannot print Google Maps - limitcheck --image--
Again, that all points to the bug being in the printer. The fact you can convert the PS to PDF is a strong indication that the PS is correct (as per the PS specification). Don't forget that both PDF and PS are vector formats, so have nearly infinite variations in how to produce (near) identical output. In addition, PS is a Turing complete programming language, which adds another almost infinite range of possibilities! One thought springs to mind: does Opera allow you to change the Postscript printing settings? For example, does it allow you to select Language Level 2 instead of Language Level 3? Doing that might avoid the problem area for the printer. If it's helpful, I could help to narrow down the exact cause of the error, that might help a report to Kyocera, the Opera people produce a workaround, or maybe even find a workaround in cups. But a) that will need help, patience and paper from you (kniffte), and b) will have to wait until after the 6th Jan when I'm actually back at my desk (officially, I'm currently on vacation). -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1263415 Title: Kyocera FS-1100D cannot print Google Maps - limitcheck --image-- To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/1263415/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 978120] Re: Toshiba Estudio 230 printer driver bug
Okay, so it's clear that the Toshiba has an issue with how we handle TrueType/Type42 fonts - I know I'm repeating myself, but the Postscript is *totally* correct, many other interpreters from many source handle it happily, and both myself and another engineer with a great deal of Postscript experience have carefully reviewed it, found nothing incorrect (although, we both agree it is not how we would have written it!). So, again, I would urge you (Tomas) to contact Toshiba and report this as a bug - their interpreter is failing to interpret valid and logically correct Postscript. Anyway, back to our immediate concern. The issue can be worked around by adding the following to the Ghostscript command line (when called from CUPs): -dHaveTrueTypes=false -c "<< /MaxFontItem 50 >> setuserparams " -f What we have is the "HaveTrueTypes" setting which tells ps2write whether it should emit TrueType/Type42 fonts. Setting it to "false" means we convert the TTF outlines into bitmaps. This can happen in two ways: the bitmaps can be used to create a Type 3 Postscript font (this is preferred as it results in smaller file size, executes quicker on the target and often results in better quality output), or they are just normal image data in the PS. The choice between the two approaches is dictated by the value of "MaxFontItem" - any glyph larger than MaxFontItem will end up as "normal" image data, rather than in a Type 3 font. Hence, I included code to set the value of MaxFontItem quite high, meaning we'll use the Type 3 font approach as often as is reasonable - but I'm wary about setting it too high, as I don't want to trigger resource problems on the target printers. Till, this definitely should only apply to Toshiba printers (maybe just the Estudio range), and ideally, it would be good to set the resolution for Ghostscript to that of the target printer, or an integer division thereof: i.e. if the printer is 600dpi, you could reasonably set the resolution to 300dpi. It would preferable to avoid scaling by a non- integer value from both a performance and quality point of view. Any questions, just ask.. (although, I can't promise a good answer!) -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/978120 Title: Toshiba Estudio 230 printer driver bug To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/978120/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 978120] Re: Toshiba Estudio 230 printer driver bug
Tomas, Thanks for taking the time to report it to the manufacturer (not many users do!). If I'm honest, I doubt you'll get much response (based on past experience), but as I said before, I think we need to start making it clear to printer makers that these broken implementations aren't acceptable. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/978120 Title: Toshiba Estudio 230 printer driver bug To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/978120/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1688636] Re: Firefox gets stuck in a page fault
Would it be fair to guess is this same as, or related to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/firefox/+bug/1686568 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1688636 Title: Firefox gets stuck in a page fault To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/firefox/+bug/1688636/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1686568] Re: Firefox Does Not Respond. Process can not be killed. Terminal commands to kill the process freeze. Logout Freeze.
FWIW, I see the same symptoms with both Firefox and (just now) Thunderbird, and I am using the Nouveau NVidia drivers - I mention that as I seem to recall a vaguely similar sounding issue a couple of years ago that could be worked around why switching away from the NVidia proprietary drivers (which the OP in this seems to be using). -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1686568 Title: Firefox Does Not Respond. Process can not be killed. Terminal commands to kill the process freeze. Logout Freeze. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/firefox/+bug/1686568/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1688636] Re: Firefox gets stuck in a page fault
It probably needs an admin - hopefully, they'll see it. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1688636 Title: Firefox gets stuck in a page fault To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/firefox/+bug/1688636/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1688636] Re: Firefox gets stuck in a page fault
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 1686568 *** https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1686568 ** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 1686568 Firefox Does Not Respond. Process can not be killed. Terminal commands to kill the process freeze. Logout Freeze. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1688636 Title: Firefox gets stuck in a page fault To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/firefox/+bug/1688636/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 977912] Re: Kyocera FS1320D needs resolution set in ghostscript filter
It looks like the poppler pstops tool defaults to 300 dpi, compared to Ghostscript's ps2write's 720dpi. Normally, this would not matter (both will always try to preserve scalability whenever possible), but when flattening transparency, the resulting image is created at the requested resolution. Both flatten PDF transparency groups to images in a similar fashion. I suspect a number of the performance issues with Postscript printers stem from this, so the simple "fix" is to add "-r300" to the GS command line to get comparable output to the pstops. As stated above, a nice enhancement would be to choose a resolution which is an integer diviser of the actual printer resolution: so for 600, 1200 and 2400 dpi, 300 is a good setting. For 720, 1440, 2880 dpi, 360 would be a good setting. FWIW, it might be informative to assess the actual operating resolution of the poppler based "toraster" utility in the cups workflow, and see if that was also using a fixed (default?) resolution. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/977912 Title: Kyocera FS1320D needs resolution set in ghostscript filter To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/977912/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 977912] Re: Kyocera FS1320D needs resolution set in ghostscript filter
Till, It is confusing why using the "native" resolution doesn't result in the fastest printing. Some thoughts (based on some experience with Kyocera products): there may be some extremely poor buffer management going on, meaning that the larger amount of data causes this kind of slow down. Second, it's possible that the printer is *actually* working at 300dpi dot size, and the higher resolution settings are actually dot *placement* precision - that is rare on laser printers, so I would be surprised, but common on inkjet type printers. We know their *downsampling* of image data is slow. Third, and something I have seen on laser printers: the printer is using 1200dpi for text and line art, but 300 dpi for contone image work - this is sometimes used because detail is the primary concern with text/line art, whilst colour fidelity is usually more important for contone image output. Again, the slow downsampling would come into play here. There are plenty of other possibilities, and without some information from Kyocera, we're unlikely to ever know for sure. Chris -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/977912 Title: Kyocera FS1320D needs resolution set in ghostscript filter To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/977912/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 950713] Re: Brother printer fails to print anything but a blank page
After a *lot* of help from a user of the Kyocera printers which *seem* to have the same problem, we've come up with a *possible* solution - although, note that the Kyocera printer showed a different symptom: it froze. But, anyway, could someone with the Brother printers seeing this problem try this file: http://www.ghostscript.com/~chrisl/Ausgabe.ps And post here if you see improved/different behaviour. Thanks! Chris -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/950713 Title: Brother printer fails to print anything but a blank page To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/950713/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 950713] Re: Brother printer fails to print anything but a blank page
Richard, Thanks for trying it. It's a shame it didn't work.. This is a bit of a long shot, but I've "instrumented" a simple PS file, if you (or someone) wouldn't mind sending it to the printer with nc (sorry, but without access to the actual printer, it's a bit of stabbing in the dark): http://www.ghostscript.com/~chrisl/nearly-empty-ps2w-01.ps That file, run to completion, should print a series of numbers up to a maximum of 280, the a few lower numbers after that - the last line of numbers looks like "279 280 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215". I'm hoping *some* of those numbers will appear on the page that finally gets ejected from your printer. If not we'll have to try an even more tedious binary chop exercise. Chris -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/950713 Title: Brother printer fails to print anything but a blank page To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/950713/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 950713] Re: Brother printer fails to print anything but a blank page
Richard, Thanks, that was helpful, but confusing. Here's another file for you to try. It will print a series of "here xx" statments in column, can you tell me what the last number "xx" is? http://www.ghostscript.com/~chrisl/nearly-empty-ps2w-02.ps Some other questions: I understand some of the printers with this problem have a web interface to a status page: does yours, and does it show stdout and stderr messages? Also, this *could* get a bit tedious - is there a mthod of communication which would be more convenient for you, or is working through the bug tracker okay? Chris -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/950713 Title: Brother printer fails to print anything but a blank page To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/950713/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 950713] Re: Brother printer fails to print anything but a blank page
Richard, So, the line immediately after the "here 5" print is attempting to retrieve the currently defined halftone for the printer. I wonder if Brother have some "clever" halftone tech that they hobble the currenthalftone operator.. This is the same test file as above, but with the line trying to retrieve the current half tone commented out: http://www.ghostscript.com/~chrisl/nearly-empty-ps2w-03.ps Please can you try that? (again, sorry for all these tests..) Thanks again.. Chris -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/950713 Title: Brother printer fails to print anything but a blank page To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/950713/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 950713] Re: Brother printer fails to print anything but a blank page
Folks, A user joined us on IRC, and helped me further narrow the problem. It turns out the Brother printers really do seem to dislike the currenthalftone operator - but instead of giving an error, which is the "correct" thing to do, it just chokes and spits the page out. So we have the core of the problem. This may not be too easy to work- around, but we've got good information now. Chris -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/950713 Title: Brother printer fails to print anything but a blank page To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/950713/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 950713] Re: Brother printer fails to print anything but a blank page
So, I looked at the logic in the Postscript prologue, and I may have been a bit pessimistic in my assessment above - it really depends on how "clever" Brother have been in their implementation of this "feature". Once again, can someone/anyone run this file: http://www.ghostscript.com/~chrisl/printout-12.04.ps to their Brother printer using "nc", please? If someone finds this test works, could others try as well, please? This is such a strange problem, it would be good to get it confirmed on more than one Brother printer. Chris -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/950713 Title: Brother printer fails to print anything but a blank page To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/950713/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 950713] Re: Brother printer fails to print anything but a blank page
That's great, thanks for all the help, especially from Robert and
zanaga, really appreciate it.
Till,
I'm afraid it's a 3 lines, rather than just the one this time - to get
this working, I prepended the following to the file:
/currenthalftone {//null} bind def
/orig.sethalftone systemdict /sethalftone get def
/sethalftone {dup //null eq not {//orig.sethalftone}{pop} ifelse} bind def
Hopefully, you can use the same mechanism for adding those lines for the
Brother printers as you're doing for the single line Kyocera change.
*Very* interesting problem..
Chris
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/950713
Title:
Brother printer fails to print anything but a blank page
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/950713/+subscriptions
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 950713] Re: Brother printer fails to print anything but a blank page
Till, Yes, directly after the "%!..." line is fine. In fact, if you can, it would be nice if you could include an extra comment just before these additions (for this and the Kyocera bug) with a note about why the extra lines are there - it might save come confusion debugging future issues. Chris -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/950713 Title: Brother printer fails to print anything but a blank page To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/950713/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 955553] Re: 12.04 Beta 1: Brother MFC8680DN cannot print text file
Bruce (or anyone else with the problem), We *think* it might be a problem Type 3 fonts. I'm going to attach five modifed Postscript files to this bug, please use the command mentioned above: lpr -P MFC-8680DN -oraw printout-uncompress-.ps to send each directly to the printer. Please tell us which, if any, work as expected. NOTE: please run them all (even if you hit one that works) - there are several possible sources for this problem (if it's what we think it might be), and knowing which combination of changes works or not *might* help us narrow down where the fix should happen. Chris -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/93 Title: 12.04 Beta 1: Brother MFC8680DN cannot print text file To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/93/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 955553] Re: 12.04 Beta 1: Brother MFC8680DN cannot print text file
** Attachment added: "printout-uncompressed-01.ps" https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/93/+attachment/2874466/+files/printout-uncompressed-01.ps -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/93 Title: 12.04 Beta 1: Brother MFC8680DN cannot print text file To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/93/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 955553] Re: 12.04 Beta 1: Brother MFC8680DN cannot print text file
** Attachment added: "printout-uncompressed-02.ps" https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/93/+attachment/2874467/+files/printout-uncompressed-02.ps -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/93 Title: 12.04 Beta 1: Brother MFC8680DN cannot print text file To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/93/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 955553] Re: 12.04 Beta 1: Brother MFC8680DN cannot print text file
** Attachment added: "printout-uncompressed-03.ps" https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/93/+attachment/2874468/+files/printout-uncompressed-03.ps -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/93 Title: 12.04 Beta 1: Brother MFC8680DN cannot print text file To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/93/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 955553] Re: 12.04 Beta 1: Brother MFC8680DN cannot print text file
** Attachment added: "printout-uncompressed-05.ps" https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/93/+attachment/2874471/+files/printout-uncompressed-05.ps -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/93 Title: 12.04 Beta 1: Brother MFC8680DN cannot print text file To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/93/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 955553] Re: 12.04 Beta 1: Brother MFC8680DN cannot print text file
** Attachment added: "printout-uncompressed-04.ps" https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/93/+attachment/2874469/+files/printout-uncompressed-04.ps -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/93 Title: 12.04 Beta 1: Brother MFC8680DN cannot print text file To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/93/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 955553] Re: 12.04 Beta 1: Brother MFC8680DN cannot print text file
Ian, Still guessing here (this is possibly going to be *much* harder to track down than the previous one). This *should* disable the font glyph cache, so please try this file.. Thanks, Chris ** Attachment added: "printout-uncompressed-nocache.ps" https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/93/+attachment/2875813/+files/printout-uncompressed-nocache.ps -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/93 Title: 12.04 Beta 1: Brother MFC8680DN cannot print text file To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/93/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 955553] Re: 12.04 Beta 1: Brother MFC8680DN cannot print text file
Ian, Can we just clarify what you meant when you said: "All of them printed out 2 pages on my HL5250DN printer using the Brother-HL-5250DN BR-Script3 driver." There should not be any "driver" involved, these Postscript files should be streamed directly to the printer. I just want to make sure you didn't open them in evince (or similar) and print from there. Thanks, Chris -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/93 Title: 12.04 Beta 1: Brother MFC8680DN cannot print text file To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/93/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 955553] Re: 12.04 Beta 1: Brother MFC8680DN cannot print text file
And a second method of disabling the glyph cache.. Please try this one, too. ** Attachment added: "printout-uncompressed-nocache-02.ps" https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/93/+attachment/2875899/+files/printout-uncompressed-nocache-02.ps -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/93 Title: 12.04 Beta 1: Brother MFC8680DN cannot print text file To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/93/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 955553] Re: 12.04 Beta 1: Brother MFC8680DN cannot print text file
Ian,
Thanks. And thanks for the clarification about sending the file - I'm
not doubting your testing, I'm just *stunned* by these results!
Can you just confirm that in *all* these tests so far the "header" part ("File:
/home/bruce" etc, and the horizontal rule) has bee present in all of them.
Thanks,
Chris
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/93
Title:
12.04 Beta 1: Brother MFC8680DN cannot print text file
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/93/+subscriptions
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 955553] Re: 12.04 Beta 1: Brother MFC8680DN cannot print text file
Folks, I ran out of time today, but I will have some more tests to try tomorrow. Chris -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/93 Title: 12.04 Beta 1: Brother MFC8680DN cannot print text file To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/93/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 955553] Re: 12.04 Beta 1: Brother MFC8680DN cannot print text file
Bruce, The PDF contains a CIDFont which, when coverted via Ghostscript's ps2write device is converted in one (or more) Type 3 fonts - this is because, as the name suggests, ps2write outputs Level 2 Postscript, and CIDFonts are a Level 3 feature. I would assume that the PS the mail client emitted was Level 3, and thus could safely include CIDFonts, *or* handled the lack CIDFont support in a different manner. It does *seem* that the Brother printer has a problem the Type 3 font we're generating. So, here are a couple more test jobs for anyone willing to try: First is a much more basic Type 3 font test - this is basically to make sure that the Brother printer is handling Type 3 fonts at all (if not, we're in a *lot* of trouble). This should print two numbered lines with an "A", a triangle and square repeated a few times. Please tell us the the results you get with it: http://www.ghostscript.com/~chrisl/brother-t3font-01.ps Second is a cut down version of the original test job, with only an upper case "J" character at the bottom left. I expect either a blank file, or a few pixels of the glyph to be visible. Debugging with the smaller file will be easier, but I want to make sure the smaller file still goes wrong before experimenting with it: http://www.ghostscript.com/~chrisl/printout-uncompressed-01.ps NOTE: I think I have all the printer specific runes correct, but I may have made a mistake, so if the printer barfs on either, please note the error, and post it here. Thanks, Chris -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/93 Title: 12.04 Beta 1: Brother MFC8680DN cannot print text file To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/93/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 955553] Re: 12.04 Beta 1: Brother MFC8680DN cannot print text file
Hi, Thanks! It looks like I uploaded the wrong job, hence the second one giving an error. But the fact that we can reproduce the problem with my entirely hand- coded Postscript is good - that will be much easier to experiment with. We've shown the problem is with Type 3 glyphs with image masks in them, so we're narrowing down the problem. So, here's the second experiment: http://www.ghostscript.com/~chrisl/brother-t3font-02.ps Again, we're looking for the numbered lines with "A", trangle glyph and square glyph. Chris -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/93 Title: 12.04 Beta 1: Brother MFC8680DN cannot print text file To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/93/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 955553] Re: 12.04 Beta 1: Brother MFC8680DN cannot print text file
That is very odd. I flipped the A glyph bit map upside down, so I would have expected *some* difference to appear. Two things: has anyone thought to take this up with Brother? *Loads* of other interpreters work just fine with this Postscript, and whilst we're willing accept the problem is with the Postscript, it would probably be much quicker for Brother to track down that problem than for us. Anyway, second thing is another test - this has the "A" bitmap drawn *outside* the font as well - it should be very obvious. http://www.ghostscript.com/~chrisl/brother-t3font-03.ps Chris -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/93 Title: 12.04 Beta 1: Brother MFC8680DN cannot print text file To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/93/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 955553] Re: 12.04 Beta 1: Brother MFC8680DN cannot print text file
Richard, Can you try this one: http://www.ghostscript.com/~chrisl/brother-nofont-03.ps Chris -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/93 Title: 12.04 Beta 1: Brother MFC8680DN cannot print text file To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/93/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 955553] Re: 12.04 Beta 1: Brother MFC8680DN cannot print text file
Bruce, See comment #10 from Till. Chris -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/93 Title: 12.04 Beta 1: Brother MFC8680DN cannot print text file To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/93/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 955553] Re: 12.04 Beta 1: Brother MFC8680DN cannot print text file
Richard (or anyone else interested), It seems astonishing that these *basic* Postscript capabilities are this buggy on the printer! Anyway, by way of another elimination: http://www.ghostscript.com/~chrisl/brother-nofont-04.ps On a *functional* Postscript interpreter, that prints 3 "A" characters across the centre of the page - these are just bitmaps, they are not contained in a font of any kind. What they have is three different ways of storing the data. I'm trying to eliminate the various data filters available in Postscript as being the source of the problem. NOTE: there is bare binary data in this file, and that can sometimes cause problems with communication channels, if that proves to be the case and you get an error from the printer, please try this one: http://www.ghostscript.com/~chrisl/brother-nofont-04-nobin.ps Chris -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/93 Title: 12.04 Beta 1: Brother MFC8680DN cannot print text file To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/93/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 955553] Re: 12.04 Beta 1: Brother MFC8680DN cannot print text file
Bruce, Woohoo! Finally, some progress! The garbled third character in brother- nofont-04.ps was the one with the naked binary, so the binary data probably got mangled en-route to the printer. And brother- npfont-04-nobin.ps only had the two characters in it. *So*, it looks like the problem is with the CCITT Group4 FAX decode filter on the printer - that's a Postscript compression filter tailored to monochrome image data. I'm going to ask my coleague to do a quick hack in the ps2write code so we can produce a test case from the original PDF above, but not using that the problem compression code. Hopefully I'll have that test for you tomorrow. Chris -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/93 Title: 12.04 Beta 1: Brother MFC8680DN cannot print text file To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/93/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 955553] Re: 12.04 Beta 1: Brother MFC8680DN cannot print text file
Hi Guys, As promised, more tests to try. This file is made from the original PDF attached above, nothing has been cut out or modified in the *page content*. The Postscript differences as described: First has the glyph bitmaps uncompressed: http://www.ghostscript.com/~chrisl/nocompression.ps Second has the glyph bitmaps RLE compessed: http://www.ghostscript.com/~chrisl/rle.ps If you can send those to your printer(s), and post the results please. Chris -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/93 Title: 12.04 Beta 1: Brother MFC8680DN cannot print text file To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/93/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 955553] Re: 12.04 Beta 1: Brother MFC8680DN cannot print text file
Bruce, That is, indeed, progress. The good news is that we now know exactly where the problem lies, and what we can do work around it. The less good news is that there is no way to achieve that without patching Ghostscript and the CUPS workflow. I believe (although it's not my area of responsibility) that the Ghostscript changes are pretty straightforward, so should not take long to implement - once done, we'll let Till know what he needs to do in CUPS to make this work. Bruce and Richard, thanks again for your patience and help tracking this down! Chris -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/93 Title: 12.04 Beta 1: Brother MFC8680DN cannot print text file To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/93/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1476705] Re: postscript printer hideously slow in some cases (pdftops)
The problem, I suspect, is the way Cairo rights PDF files (the gmap.pdf file you attached above was created by Cairo). The Cairo *always* writes the page contents into one or more PDF transparency groups - even when all the contents are really opaque. The issue is that, due to the way PDF works (and PDF transparency in particular) the only way to be sure that all the page contents are opaque would be to pre-process each page, checking for non-opaque content, and then re-interpret the page using the information gleaned in the first pass - which would, frankly, result in an unacceptable performance drop for the vast majority of PDF files. Most interpreters I know will pre-scan the quickly accessible elements of a PDF page, and if no transparency constructs are found, will then elide the extra processing transparency requires. Unfortunately, those easily accessible elements don't contain (or, at least, don't reliably contain) the actual opacity information. So, in most cases I know, just the existence of the transparency constructs means that extra processing is enabled, regardless of the actual opacity values. Now, secondly, Postscript cannot represent PDF transparency in high level (vector etc) operations. So, the only way to get a visually accurate representation of a PDF containing transparency in Postscript is to "flatten" the transparency by rendering it to a sampled image - and clearly, sampled images end up being larger than vector graphics. Hence we have the result that basically every Cairo produced PDF will convert to Postscript as one or more sampled images per page. And that explains why the Postscript is so much larger than the PDF. Now, looking at the Postscript file you posted, it *appears* that the rendering for transparency flattening is being done at 1200dpi which is, frankly, ridiculous for a couple of reasons. First is, your printer has a maximum physical resolution of 600dpi (the ImageRET modes provide enhanced quality, claimed to be equivalent to 2400 and, IIRC, 3600 dpi, but the printer is still a 600 dpi printer). Secondly, our experience with Ghostscript's Postscript output, is that many printers are much, *much* faster at upsampling images than downsampling. So, my first suggestion would be to poke around the CUPS dialogues and/or the PPD, and see if you can drop the claimed resolution of the printer to at most 600dpi and, frankly, I'd even try 300 dpi. As a rule of thumb, in the printing world, it's generally claimed that dropping continuous tone, sampled image resolution by 50% from the physical resolution results in almost no visible loss of quality. Where that falls down, in cases like this, is because there is text involved, and the small details inherent in text shapes may well suffer visibly. Another thing we've found with the Postscript output from Ghostscript is that many printers are very, very slow at decompressing data, so if you can find an option to avoid compressing image data, that *might* make a difference - but that is highly printer dependent. I'd like to take this opportunity to rant (again): this kind of thing is the reason that PDF is such poor, poor choice as a print spool format. PDF has a *hugely* rich imaging model, *far* more so than Postscript, PCL5/PXL or any of the proprietary page description languages (PDL), which means for almost any low/midrange PDL based printer, there is a very high chance that the PDF content cannot be converted to a high level, vector representation, and must be rendered and sent as sampled images (bitmaps). Perhaps a PDF/A or PDF/X variant would be a better choice.. And I'm sure someone will point out that more and more printers are supporting direct PDF printing, but that really just moves the bottleneck: PDF transparency is (over!) complex, and is extremely processor and memory intensive. So a low/mid range printer, with limited memory and processing power, is going to struggle to print a file like these ones. In truth, many such PDF printers "get around" this by either not supporting transparency at all, or supporting only relatively trivial subset of the full PDF transparency model. Also, with more and more applications integrating Cairo to do their PDF output, with the transparency problems outlined above, the situation is only set to get worse. Anyway, as I said, look into adjusting the resolution, and possibly compression settings, and let us know how you fare. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1476705 Title: postscript printer hideously slow in some cases (pdftops) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/poppler/+bug/1476705/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1476705] Re: postscript printer hideously slow in some cases (pdftops)
Bruno, To be honest, I don't know what differs between the two tools, as they both come from Cairo, I assumed that pdftops was just a small wrapper around the same code as pdftocairo but with the options pre-set for PS output. I'm a Ghostscript developer, so I can't really answer specifics about Cairo - I know about the problems with the Cairo PDF output, as we've performance problems in Ghostscript with those, and have had some fairly lengthy (and heated) discussions with Cairo developers on the subject. And I have helped debug a lot of these problems with the Ghostscript output, so I can give general suggestions as I did above. If I had to guess, I would say that pdftocairo is possibly spotting that the PDF originated as a Cairo file, and is using "inside" knowledge of how those are constructed to convert it back into Cairo internal representation, which is then outputs to Postscript - with that level of extra information, it can probably be much, much smarter about when there is real transparency that it has to render, and when everything opaque, and remain in high level form. Whilst, pstops may be doing a simpler, one step PDF to Postscript conversion. Ideally, what you'd want to try is (if possible) to keep the "ProRes" (I thought it was "ImageRET") mode, but still tell pdftocairo to use 600 dpi, as you then may get the benefits of more the accurate dot placement, better halftone results, and possibly better color management, whilst keeping the quicker processing of the smaller image data. It's hard to know without deep inside knowledge, but (again) if I had to guess, I would suggest that the slightly lower quality halftone screen is what's causing the slight intensity shift you mention. HP are pretty tight lipped about these technologies, but I know other such systems tend to allow the halftoning to represent more shades of the color, without losing detail (generally there is a trade off: you can approximate lots of shades, but lose detail, or have great detail, but very few shades). Chris -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1476705 Title: postscript printer hideously slow in some cases (pdftops) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/poppler/+bug/1476705/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1438494] Re: ghostscript fails to correctly substitute cidf fonts
Two things: 1) I *really* don't understand why Ghostscript configuration file are being installed by poppler. It would be worth finding out how (and even if) poppler actually uses them, because I rather feel poppler and Ghostscript configurations *should* be separate. For example, if I get time, I'll probably be tweaking the capabilities of cidfmap at some point, which could, potentially, break poppler's use of these files. 2) the question of whether poppler will fall back to some other substitute CIDFont is moot since, if poppler *does* use those configuration files, it won't (normally) find the font files they reference anyway. So even if poppler does use them, splitting them off into a separate package and fixing the dependencies will work better for poppler, too. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1438494 Title: ghostscript fails to correctly substitute cidf fonts To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/poppler-data/+bug/1438494/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1438494] Re: ghostscript fails to correctly substitute cidf fonts
Apologies, Till, for the delayed reply - I *thought* replying on a bug also subscribed me to it, but clearly not! (I have subscribed now). There is a bit of guess work here, as I don't fully understand the file locations. We are mainly concerned with the cidfmap file. Now, there is a set of cidfmap files in "/etc/ghostscript/cidfmap.d/" and those (it appears) are used by the "/usr/sbin/update-gsfontmap" script (poor name, as it adds to the confusion that Fonts and CIDFonts are the same thing!), to update the *actual* cidfmap which is in "/var/lib/ghostscript/fonts/cidfmap". It is not at all clear to me how the "update-gsfontmap" script gets run - possibly only as a package post-install step? The files in "/etc/ghostscript/cidfmap.d/" are as follows (file name + TTF font(s) referenced): 90gs-cjk-resource-cns1.conf - ukai.ttc, uming.ttc 90gs-cjk-resource-gb1.conf - ukai.ttc, uming.ttc 90gs-cjk-resource-japan1.conf - fonts-japanese-mincho.ttf, fonts-japanese-gothic.ttf 90gs-cjk-resource-japan2.conf - ttf-japanese-mincho.ttf, ttf-japanese-gothic.ttf 90gs-cjk-resource-korea1.conf - NanumMyeongjo.ttf, NanumBarunGothic.ttf, NanumBarunGothicBold.ttf, NanumGothic.ttf NOTE: there is some inconsistency (possibly bitrot) there with "fonts- japanese-*.ttf" used in one file and "ttf-japanese-*.ttf" used in another - clearly the same font, but likely different "generations" of name. My two alternate solutions are that the Ghostscript package should be augmented to include the fonts listed above (with the names and paths updated to reflect the current directory tree etc) as dependencies, thus they always get installed with Ghostscript. *Or* to split off (I *think*) the files in "/etc/ghostscript/cidfmap.d/" into something like a "ghostscript-cjk-cidfonts" package, which has those fonts listed above as dependencies (again with names and paths revised for a modern system). -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1438494 Title: ghostscript fails to correctly substitute cidf fonts To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ghostscript/+bug/1438494/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1438494] Re: ghostscript fails to correctly substitute cidf fonts
The root problem here is that the Ubuntu package contains cidfmap mappings that provide substitutions for various CIDFonts that may not be embedded in incoming files. But the Ghostscript package does not depend on the package(s) containing those font files, so those font files are often not available. Historically, Ghostscript has assumed that such "system level" configuration was correct, and did minimal error checking on them, thus by the time Ghostscript realises the font files are not available, it is too late to recover gracefully, and we have to error out. The most recent Ghostscript releases are more rigorous in that area, and should cope better. Nevertheless, it would be preferable if the fonts references in the mappings were made dependencies of the Ghostscipt package. *Or* remove those mappings altogether, as they are much less relevant since we now have a built-in CIDFont substitution in Ghostscript, using DroidSansFallback.ttf. A final suggestion would be to remove the mappings from the default Ghostscript package, and rely on the DroidSansFallback.ttf substitution, and move the existing mappings to a separate package which holds the mapping configuration, and depends on the packages containing the relevant font files. I feel the last suggestion would be the most desirable, since the DroidSansFallback.ttf substitution will work work just fine for the vast majority of people, who don't need to be forced to install a load of KANJI fonts, but allows the flexibility for those who genuinely need more accurate CIDFont substitution than simply falling back to DroidSansFallback.ttf. Finally, the "generic" mappings such as "Adobe-Identity" and "Adobe- Japan1" should be removed altogether as, except in very rare circumstances, those should all fall through to the DroidSansFallback.ttf substitution. I can provide a complete list of those "generic" mappings if required. Chris -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1438494 Title: ghostscript fails to correctly substitute cidf fonts To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ghostscript/+bug/1438494/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1218350] Re: stackunderflow in .setdistillerparams
That is the correct behaviour. Previous versions ignored the error, and produced the incorrect output. This is not a bug.. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1218350 Title: stackunderflow in .setdistillerparams To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ghostscript/+bug/1218350/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1218350] Re: stackunderflow in .setdistillerparams
I should add that the previous bug was with without "UseCIEColor" pdfwrite could not access/create device independent colours, hence was emitting a PDF with device dependent colours despite the "UseDeviceIndependentColor" setting. The reason UseCIEColor has to be set explicitly, and can't be done as part of the "/printer" PDFSETTINGS is that the PDFSETTINGS is a parameter (or set of parameters) for the pdfwrite device, whilst UseCIEColor is an interpreter parameter. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1218350 Title: stackunderflow in .setdistillerparams To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ghostscript/+bug/1218350/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 977912] Re: Kyocera FS1320D needs resolution set in ghostscript filter
After a *lot* to-fro testing (and a lot patience and help from Maximilian!), we've finally narrowed down the problem, and it is not a simple resolution issue. It seems that the Kyocera printer is having issues when the data filter chain looks like: ASCII85Decode->LZWDecode->ASCII85Decode Which is how CUPS currently calls Ghostscript with ps2write - so we ASCII85Encode image data, which is part of the page data stream. The page data stream is then LZWEncoded, and then that compressed page stream data is also ASCII85Encoded. So we get that by using the following command line options for Ghostscript: -dNoT3CCITT -dEncodeMonoImages=false -dEncodeColorImages=false Which we settled on to work around filter problems with the Brother printers. To get this Kyocera printer to print in a reasonable time, I used these options: -dNoT3CCITT -dCompressPages=false -dCompressFonts=false So we're compressing image data, but *not* the page streams. I have a *feeling* we tried something like the above with the Brother printers, and it didn't work, but my memory is vague - we tried *so* many things! We might have to ask one or two of the Brother users to test for us again. Chris -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/977912 Title: Kyocera FS1320D needs resolution set in ghostscript filter To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/977912/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 998087] Re: printer ERROR: invalidaccess OFFENDING COMMAND: filter
Steve, Thanks for trying that, it's eliminated the compression filters as being the problem. Before I resort to "instrumenting" the Postscript, which will use up paper, can you try this file, please? Again, like this: lpr -P -o raw stream1-uc2.ps This changes the how the font data is encoded (note, for any Postscript afficianados reading this: it doesn't change the font's Encoding array). Again, please post your result. ** Attachment added: "pfa font version" https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/998087/+attachment/3152259/+files/stream1-uc2.ps -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/998087 Title: printer ERROR: invalidaccess OFFENDING COMMAND: filter To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/998087/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 960666] Re: 12.04 Beta 1 : Brother MFC8680DN does not print image from .pdf file
Bruce, Thanks, that's good (well, sort of!). It appears, and I am guessing here, that the printer has problems with certain conbinations of filter - in particular, it seems that it has trouble, either when multiple compression filters are chained, or multiple instances of the same filter are in the same chain. So, I think the solution/workaround is to add another option to the Ghostcript command line that cups uses for these printers - the file that worked was created with: -dCompressPages=false -dCompressFonts=false -dNoT3CCITT -dEncodeMonoImages=false -dEncodeColorImages=false Let me drop a mail to Till, and point him at this bug. Chris -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/960666 Title: 12.04 Beta 1 : Brother MFC8680DN does not print image from .pdf file To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/960666/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 960666] Re: 12.04 Beta 1 : Brother MFC8680DN does not print image from .pdf file
Already e-mailed to Till, but I made a mistake above, and the command line options were: -dNoT3CCITT -dEncodeMonoImages=false -dEncodeColorImages=false So page and font streams get compressed, but Type 3 font bitmaps, mono images and color images don't get *additional* compression. Chris -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/960666 Title: 12.04 Beta 1 : Brother MFC8680DN does not print image from .pdf file To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/960666/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 960666] Re: 12.04 Beta 1 : Brother MFC8680DN does not print image from .pdf file
> Is this the definitive solution now? Should I release cups-filters 1.0.8? I just can't answer that. We're working around a bug in a version of the Brother Postscript implementation, with no access to the internals of the interpreter. My *best guess*, based on the testing we've done, is that there is some problem with the interaction of multiple compression filters in the same filter chain, so I'm suggesting we remove the opportunities for multiple compression filters to be used in the same chain - the only case remaining where this could happen is the color image case - hence adding "-dEncodeColorImages=false". (NOTE: this is separate from the CCITT Group 4 filter problem, which is definitely broken in it's own right.) However, without being able to debug the interpreter code, I can't say byond doubt that the above *is* the problem. And I certainly can't say that there aren't any more bugs in Brother's code. I assume we've missed the beta 2 deadline, so it might be worth holding off dong a cups-filters 1.0.8 for a day or so, in case we find a workaround for the HP issue. Chris -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/960666 Title: 12.04 Beta 1 : Brother MFC8680DN does not print image from .pdf file To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/960666/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 960666] Re: 12.04 Beta 1 : Brother MFC8680DN does not print image from .pdf file
Hi Vincent, Thanks for the independent confirmation, I *really* appreciate it. Chris -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/960666 Title: 12.04 Beta 1 : Brother MFC8680DN does not print image from .pdf file To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/960666/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 960666] Re: 12.04 Beta 1 : Brother MFC8680DN does not print image from .pdf file
Vincent, I'm very relieved to hear that your other files are working, too, thanks for trying them. On both these bugs, I have urged people to contact Brother technical support, and report these problems, but no one seems willing. I feel there is little point in myself or Till doing it, because Brother are only going to take a report from an owner of one of their products. In truth, it bothers me quite a lot: it seems like folks expect us (Ghostscript) to gracefully consume whatever gets thrown at us, but then also demand that we workaround/fix/patch for quirks, idiosynchracies and outright bugs in other people's Postscrpt implementations.. Anway, mini-rant over! Thanks again, your testing is *really* appreciated. Chris -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/960666 Title: 12.04 Beta 1 : Brother MFC8680DN does not print image from .pdf file To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/960666/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 960666] Re: 12.04 Beta 1 : Brother MFC8680DN does not print image from .pdf file
Bruce, Thanks for the confirmation. As far as reporting to Brother is concerned, there is no need to mention that it worked printing from Ubuntu 10.10. Basically, take one of the Postscript files that we established fail on the printer, and tell Brother you have a Postscript file that fails to work on their Postscript printer. Postscript is a specification, and if they claim to support it, then (short of running out of memory) their interpreter should accept any compliant Postscript job - like any digitial information communication format, both the producer and comsumer need to adhere to the spec, otherwise we can't rely on the communications to work. If you want to pursue this with Brother, you can contact me at cjl (at) spamcop dot net and we can sort out a test file for Brother and if you're not confident, I can help with the wording of a report - no need to clog up this bug tracker with it. Chris -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/960666 Title: 12.04 Beta 1 : Brother MFC8680DN does not print image from .pdf file To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/960666/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 960666] Re: 12.04 Beta 1 : Brother MFC8680DN does not print image from .pdf file
I've done three tests, based on the investigations we've done: 1) http://www.ghostscript.com/~chrisl/brother/a_line_of_text.ps This test *should* print "A line of text" at the bottom left of the page, but instead simply ejects a blank page, apparently with no error indicated. We narrowed the problem down to line 202 (it seems to be the "currenthalftone" operator): /HT currenthalftone cp2g def 2) http://www.ghostscript.com/~chrisl/brother/g4fax-test.ps This should print two fairly large bitmap images of the upper case character "A", about halfway up the page, one next to the other. From the description I received from those that ran similar tests previously, I think on the Brother you should see one "A" and next to it something like "_ _" - it seems to be drawing the bottom row, or few rows of pixels from the "A" then silently giving up. The difference between the two is that the failing one is CCITT Group 4 FAX compressed, the other is not. 3) http://www.ghostscript.com/~chrisl/brother/compressed-image-test.ps (This is quite big - 2.4Mb) This contains two instances of the image from the test file for this bug (#960666). If this behaves the same as the original file, you should get one image printed correctly, and then an error (the actuall error may well be different to the originally reported one, depending on how the buffering works out). The image I hope will work is uncompressed, whilst the image that I hope induces the error is LZW compressed. Now, as for reporting this to Brother, as I said above, I feel the wording should be along the lines of "we believe, and have considerable evidence supporting the belief, that these are valid Postscript Language Level 2 files, and therefore, should be interpreted successfully by any Postscript Language Level 3 (or Level 2) interpreter. The Bother Poscript interpreter fails ". My inclination is to say there is no need to mention that, from your (the user's) point of view, printing worked in earlier versions of Ubuntu nor, in fact, is there any reason to mention the operating system at all. *Where* the jobs came from is irrelevant, the only relevant informatation is that we are confident these jobs are valid Postscript, and their Postscript implementation fails to interpret them. If those who are interested could try each of thoses tests, and make sure they fail in the expected manner (my only concern is that, in simplifying the tests, I've inadvertantly changed something that will make them work). Once we have confirmed that these files fail as expected, I will attach them to this bug, to ensure that they don't get accidentally deleted from my user area on the server. Chris -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/960666 Title: 12.04 Beta 1 : Brother MFC8680DN does not print image from .pdf file To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/960666/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 960666] Re: 12.04 Beta 1 : Brother MFC8680DN does not print image from .pdf file
1) http://www.ghostscript.com/~chrisl/brother/a_line_of_text.ps This test *should* print "A line of text" at the bottom left of the page, but instead simply ejects a blank page, apparently with no error indicated. We narrowed the problem down to line 202 (it seems to be the "currenthalftone" operator): /HT currenthalftone cp2g def ** Attachment added: "a_line_of_text.ps" https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/960666/+attachment/2923793/+files/a_line_of_text.ps -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/960666 Title: 12.04 Beta 1 : Brother MFC8680DN does not print image from .pdf file To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/960666/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 960666] Re: 12.04 Beta 1 : Brother MFC8680DN does not print image from .pdf file
2) This should print two fairly large bitmap images of the upper case character "A", about halfway up the page, one next to the other. From the description I received from those that ran similar tests previously, I think on the Brother you should see one "A" and next to it something like "_ _" - it seems to be drawing the bottom row, or few rows of pixels from the "A" then silently giving up. The difference between the two is that the failing one is CCITT Group 4 FAX compressed, the other is not. ** Attachment added: "g4fax-test.ps" https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/960666/+attachment/2923794/+files/g4fax-test.ps -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/960666 Title: 12.04 Beta 1 : Brother MFC8680DN does not print image from .pdf file To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/960666/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 960666] Re: 12.04 Beta 1 : Brother MFC8680DN does not print image from .pdf file
As I mentioned, I posted the three files, with individual descriptions, as attachments here (rather than linked to my web space, and risk them disappearing). See post #25 for my summary of what should be in a report to Brother. If anyone needs more info, wants clarification, or if Brother come back with questions on which you need input, please just ask - either here, or message me through the "Contact" facility. Chris -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/960666 Title: 12.04 Beta 1 : Brother MFC8680DN does not print image from .pdf file To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/960666/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 960666] Re: 12.04 Beta 1 : Brother MFC8680DN does not print image from .pdf file
3) (This is quite big - 2.4Mb) This contains two instances of the image from the test file for this bug (#960666). If this behaves the same as the original file, you should get one image printed correctly, and then an error (the actuall error may well be different to the originally reported one, depending on how the buffering works out). The image I hope will work is uncompressed, whilst the image that I hope induces the error is LZW compressed. ** Attachment added: "compressed-image-test.ps" https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/960666/+attachment/2923808/+files/compressed-image-test.ps -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/960666 Title: 12.04 Beta 1 : Brother MFC8680DN does not print image from .pdf file To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/960666/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 960666] Re: 12.04 Beta 1 : Brother MFC8680DN does not print image from .pdf file
Bruce, That gives you two files you can go to Brother with, and Vincent can reproduce the compressed-image-test.ps problem, so Brother will get a report about that. The "a_line_of_text.ps" test result is odd: the error message you've got there *looks* like bytes from an encoded stream - but there are no encoded streams in that file. Anyway, if you report your error to Brother, you can mention others have seen problems wit that file that we tracked down to the "currenthalftone" I mentioned above, so may be related. I'll try to revisit the compressed-image-test.ps example over the weekend, and see if there's some subtlety of your original file I missed. The problem is, as I said above, these kinds of problems can be dependant on where in the data stream buffer limits land, and so can be difficult reproduce in simple test cases. If the worst comes to the worst, I'll create a PS file from your original in post #3, and Brother will just have to deal the extra complexity. Chris -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/960666 Title: 12.04 Beta 1 : Brother MFC8680DN does not print image from .pdf file To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/960666/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 942866] Re: Ubuntu 11.10: printing to PDF produces unsearchable PDF (contrary to 10.04)
Rijk, PDF can contain CIDFonts, but Postscript Level 2 cannot (CIDFonts are a Postscript Language Level 3 feature). ps2write is a Level 2 output device (hence "2" is ps2write). So ps2write is *removing* the CIDFonts and (I think) "flattenning" them to multiple "normal" fonts, but in doing so, all the character encoding information is lost. We (Ghostscript) have tentative plans for a ps3write device, but too many other projects come first. There has been a trend for applications (both commercial and open source) to pointlessly use Type 2 CIDFonts instead of normal TrueType fonts - I say pointlessly because, CIDFonts require a heck of a lot more processing in the interpreter, compared to a normal font, so unless you actually *need* multibyte fonts, it just needlessly slows down processing the file. Chris -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/942866 Title: Ubuntu 11.10: printing to PDF produces unsearchable PDF (contrary to 10.04) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-pdf/+bug/942866/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 980616] Re: Printing Deutsche Bahn ticket on Kyocera PS printer takes 5 minutes (regression to 11.10)
As there is no transparency, no shaded fills and no CIDFonts in this file, there is nothing which is really affected by changing the resolution for ps2write. Given the error observed above, I would guess this is another filter problem. If Felix can attach the PS from Till's test PDF, I can take a look, and create some tests to *possibly* help track down the problem. Also, can we confirm *exactly* the command line being used to drive Ghostscript in this case (sorry, but with all the changes recently, I've slightly lost track!). Chris -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/980616 Title: Printing Deutsche Bahn ticket on Kyocera PS printer takes 5 minutes (regression to 11.10) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/libcairo/+bug/980616/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 980616] Re: Printing Deutsche Bahn ticket on Kyocera PS printer takes 5 minutes (regression to 11.10)
Felix, The main thing is, I need the PS that actually gets sent to the printer so that I can get the device specific settings that are inserted by CUPS (and are not present in the "bare" Ghostscript output). Then I can create variants of the PS from Ghostscript, and "hand patch" the Postscript to include the device specific settings - that way we can try different options to Ghsotscript, without having to create new CUPS packages for every option to test. I'm somewhat hopeful that fixing the error with Till's PDF will also address the performance problem with yours. Till, Is there a method to "inject" Postscript into the CUPS workflow at the point that Ghostscript would normally have created the PS? (I'm just wondering if there is an easier method for testing that me hand editing the printer specific stuff into the Postscript, and having the user "nc" it to the printer). Chris -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/980616 Title: Printing Deutsche Bahn ticket on Kyocera PS printer takes 5 minutes (regression to 11.10) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/libcairo/+bug/980616/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 980616] Re: Printing Deutsche Bahn ticket on Kyocera PS printer takes 5 minutes (regression to 11.10)
Till, Sorry, that's not quite what I meant by "inject Postscript". What I was hoping for was a way to bypass the PDF print queue (PDF is *so* unsuitable for that!), so that an end user can take Postscript directly out of Ghostscript and push it into the CUPS "back end" to have the PPD derived stuff added, and CUPS related workarounds added, and then sent to the printer. It would save me having to hand edit all the Postscript files to add the PJL, the "bind" workaround, the PPD settings and such to every test job we try. Chris -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/980616 Title: Printing Deutsche Bahn ticket on Kyocera PS printer takes 5 minutes (regression to 11.10) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/libcairo/+bug/980616/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 977912] Re: Kyocera FS1320D needs resolution set in ghostscript filter
What we were talking about is, if you look in Acrobat Pro, in the dialogue for creating Postscript, it has a drop down menu titled "Transparency Flattener Preset" which has the options "High Resolution", "Medium Resoluiton" and "Low Resolution". Those options are totally independent of the resolution of the target printer. It gives the user the option of "I want the best quality, however long it takes", "I want it as fast as possible, and damn the quality" or something in-between. So, in a similar manner, it might be good to allow users to specify the "flattening resolution" (passed to Ghostscript) independently of the printer resolution (default behaviour would obviously be as it works now). You could even do something like "High" (current behaviour), "Medium" (flattener resolution == printer res / 2), "Low" (flattener res == printer res / 3), or "Custom" (allowing the user the specify their own flattener resolution). As mentioned above, this is a *feature* suggestion/request for your consideration, not a bug report. It's just something that occurred to me might be useful for a future CUPS release. Chris -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/977912 Title: Kyocera FS1320D needs resolution set in ghostscript filter To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/977912/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 980616] Re: Printing Deutsche Bahn ticket on Kyocera PS printer takes 5 minutes (regression to 11.10)
Till, AIUI, lpr -o raw ... Is just a passthrough direct to the printer, so I *still* have to manually edit *every* test file to get it to work on the printer. If it's the pdftops filter that adds (at least some of) the printer specific stuff, then I'll assume there's no way for me to avoid the hand editing :-( -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/980616 Title: Printing Deutsche Bahn ticket on Kyocera PS printer takes 5 minutes (regression to 11.10) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/libcairo/+bug/980616/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 998087] Re: printer ERROR: invalidaccess OFFENDING COMMAND: filter
I can't answer that. I can say that Ghostscript's ps2write output is valid Level 2 Postscript - in other words, it is compliant with the language defined in the Adobe Postscript Language Reference Manual Edition 2. And not especially challenging Postscript, either. Let me ask this: if gcc fails to compile C code that is demonstrably compliant with the C89 spec (for example), is that the fault of the coder who wrote the failing code, or a bug in gcc? None of the issues that have arisen so far have highlighted any problem with our Postscript output. And did poppler's output always "just work", or did they go through similar issues, possibly over a longer period? -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/998087 Title: printer ERROR: invalidaccess OFFENDING COMMAND: filter To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/998087/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 998087] Re: printer ERROR: invalidaccess OFFENDING COMMAND: filter
Steve, Yes, Ghostscript has replaced poppler, mainly due to the color management now available in GS, which currently only applies to printer drivers which use raster output - rather than ones like yours that use Postscript. Ultimately, the improved color management will apply to Postscript (and PDF) output from Ghostscript. I seem to remember that there is a comment in the ps2write code to the effect that some filters on HP printers erroneously always close their underlying data source (closing it should be optional). I can't think of any other way for a call to create a decode filter to produce an invalidaccess error. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/998087 Title: printer ERROR: invalidaccess OFFENDING COMMAND: filter To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/998087/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1438494] Re: ghostscript fails to correctly substitute cidf fonts
Your file contains neither fonts nor CIDFonts, it is simply one big image. Whilst it is common practice for scanner produced PDF to use OCR to overlay the scanned image with non-marking characters (obviously, being non-marking, the actual font used does not really matter), this file does not do so. I'd guess that's because either the OCR function was disabled, or it simply could not recognise the handwritten characters. Anyway, as our 9.16 release fails with the same error as you saw (i.e. the error is not caused by the Ubuntu packaging), but the 9.18 release (which I assume is what you tested) works without error, I had a hunt, and found that the fix is this one: http://git.ghostscript.com/?p=ghostpdl.git;a=commitdiff;h=668406a5 I would suggest, if you want the maintainer to pull in this patch, you *may* want to open a new bug report, referencing the above commit. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1438494 Title: ghostscript fails to correctly substitute cidf fonts To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/poppler-data/+bug/1438494/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1525225] Re: gs has issues with pdfs which only consist of large images
The problem is already fixed in 9.18. If wanted to apply the fix to the 9.16 code in Ubuntu 15.10, you can pull the patch from: http://git.ghostscript.com/?p=ghostpdl.git;a=commitdiff;h=668406a5 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1525225 Title: gs has issues with pdfs which only consist of large images To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ghostscript/+bug/1525225/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1366743] Re: Ubuntu 14.04 only prints LibreOffice Docs
Odd, that "printout" file is from the cairo/poppler "pdftops" filter, rather than the Ghostscript one that I deal with. If you can repeat the tests after running: lpadmin -p HP-Color-LaserJet-2550 -o pdftops-renderer-default=gs And post your results and another "printout" file. If you want to, you can open the "printout" file in a text editor and look at the comments in the first 20 lines or so, and see whether it was created by Poppler or Ghostscript. Thanks I'll leave it to Till to decide whether to contact the appropriate Cairo/poppler folks. Chris -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1366743 Title: Ubuntu 14.04 only prints LibreOffice Docs To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/1366743/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1366743] Re: Ubuntu 14.04 only prints LibreOffice Docs
Sorry, but that "printout" file is still the Poppler created one. I'm afraid I'm going to need Till's input on this as my knowledge of cups is limited (and now exhausted) - I only really do the Ghostscript end of things.. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1366743 Title: Ubuntu 14.04 only prints LibreOffice Docs To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/1366743/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1263415] Re: Kyocera FS-1100D cannot print Google Maps - limitcheck --image--
If I am correct, and (like the cases we've hacked around with the Ghostscript output) the Postscript is perfectly valid and correct, you may find that the Opera developers aren't willing to change that perfectly valid Postscript output to work around a bug in a printer. Really this is very likely a Kyocera problem, not an Opera (nor a CUPS) problem. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1263415 Title: Kyocera FS-1100D cannot print Google Maps - limitcheck --image-- To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/1263415/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1263415] Re: Kyocera FS-1100D cannot print Google Maps - limitcheck --image--
Sorry, I haven't spoken, read or written German since I was at school! But Google translate did a good enough job to get the idea of what they said and, frankly, I strongly disagree with what they say. What they have written implies that they have not actually analysed the Postscript you have sent, they have simply looked at the error message, and replied based on that. Valid Postscript adheres to a standard (written and published by Adobe), and whilst various companies have their own additional customisations, the core language must adhere to the standard or it is not valid Postscript. I have access to six different Postscript implementations: Adobe Distiller, Global Graphics Harlequin, Global Graphics JaWS, a Postscript implementation also from Kyocera(!!), Ghostscript (of course!), and with sufficient prior arrangement, Adobe CPSI. All the above run your file to completion without errors or warnings (including the Kyocera one). In addition, I've looked fairly carefully at the Postscript myself, and I see no problems with it. Based on the above, the Opera Postscript output is valid, correct Postscript, and the bug is with the printer. FWIW, I am quite happy for you to quote me on that, or even to follow up with Kyocera Germany on your behalf (assuming they can accept e-mails in English!). There is almost no point trying to compare the Postscript produced by different applications - Postscript is a turing complete programming language, as well as page description language, there are, therefore, an almost infinite number of totally different ways a given page can be represented. It's *highly* unlikely you (or anyone) will be able to look at the two sets of output, and pin-point the cause of the problem. The only way to narrow down the problem is, as I described before, for someone like me to hand edit the Postscript, progressively cutting it down, and possibly "instrumenting" it, so that you can try the each iteration on your printer, until we reach the one thing (or set of things) that causes the problem. It is a laborious process, that takes time, paper and toner, but it really is the only option. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1263415 Title: Kyocera FS-1100D cannot print Google Maps - limitcheck --image-- To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/1263415/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 998087] Re: printer ERROR: invalidaccess OFFENDING COMMAND: filter
I'm confused: my understanding was that this bug was resolved. Besides, the thread seems to have become rather convoluted and confused. If a problem is still occurring, could you open a new bug (subscribe me so I see it), and we'll take things from there, please? -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/998087 Title: printer ERROR: invalidaccess OFFENDING COMMAND: filter To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/998087/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 998087] Re: printer ERROR: invalidaccess OFFENDING COMMAND: filter
Till, you know I can't answer that. For the issues we're looked at *not one* has actually highlighted any issue with Ghostscript's Postscript output, the Postscript has *always* been valid and correct. There's simply no way I can guess at what bugs other interpreters may or may not have. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/998087 Title: printer ERROR: invalidaccess OFFENDING COMMAND: filter To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/998087/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 998087] Re: printer ERROR: invalidaccess OFFENDING COMMAND: filter
Oh, and no need to apologize - we all want to get this stuff working. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/998087 Title: printer ERROR: invalidaccess OFFENDING COMMAND: filter To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/998087/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 998087] Re: printer ERROR: invalidaccess OFFENDING COMMAND: filter
PDFs are vector format (with the option embed raster graphics "images" in them) so they don't have an inherent resolution. It's more likely that a "light" PDF doesn't have images, or other "advanced" PDF features, that need converted into something else (PDF supports features that Postscript does not). Or possibly the "lighter" PDF doesn't embed fonts, or doesn't embed as many or as large fonts. It's *really* impossible to guess without an awful lot of work from someone like me, and an awful of help from you to narrow down the printer's bug, and assess if there is a workaround. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/998087 Title: printer ERROR: invalidaccess OFFENDING COMMAND: filter To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/998087/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 998087] Re: printer ERROR: invalidaccess OFFENDING COMMAND: filter
Tomas, As this bug was reported as a problem with a HP LaserJet 4050, for which a fix has been released, I would ask you, please, to open a new bug, and subscribe me (cliddell) to the new bug, and we'll work forward from there. The instructions of what to do are here: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DebuggingPrintingProblems#Getting_the_data_which_would_go_to_the_printer But there is no point in attaching the two sets of output since the Postscript from Poppler is totally different to the Postscript from Ghostscript, and thus there's no chance of using a comparison to help. Just attach the failing Postscript - but note the next paragraph I'm happy to work through the issue and track down the source of the problem, but it will mean a lot of hand editing of Postscript files by me, and having to rely on you to send them to the printer and report the results back to me (and possibly mean burning through paper, too). We can probably find a workaround for the problem *if* we can narrow it down. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/998087 Title: printer ERROR: invalidaccess OFFENDING COMMAND: filter To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/998087/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 998087] Re: printer ERROR: invalidaccess OFFENDING COMMAND: filter
Tomas, if you're getting the same "invalidfont" error as reported in #978120, then we can continue with that bug, if your error is different, I'd prefer a new bug. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/998087 Title: printer ERROR: invalidaccess OFFENDING COMMAND: filter To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/998087/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 998087] Re: printer ERROR: invalidaccess OFFENDING COMMAND: filter
Yes, that's probably the "subset prefix" - it's six random letters that differentiate a complete font from a subset font. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/998087 Title: printer ERROR: invalidaccess OFFENDING COMMAND: filter To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/998087/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 978120] Re: Toshiba Estudio 230 printer driver bug
Okay. so the next thing I'll ask you to do is to try step 10 from this section: http://tinyurl.com/p5cb4kf And see if that works better, and if not, attach the non-compressed file. Thanks! -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/978120 Title: Toshiba Estudio 230 printer driver bug To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/978120/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 978120] Re: Toshiba Estudio 230 printer driver bug
Hmm, that's not producing a non-compressed file - hopefully, Till will pipe up to tell us what's going wrong (as mentioned elsewhere, I'm not a CUPS guy, I'm a Ghostscript guy.). -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/978120 Title: Toshiba Estudio 230 printer driver bug To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/978120/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 978120] Re: Toshiba Estudio 230 printer driver bug
OKay, I have "manually" decompressed the various parts of the contents of the file (you'll note it is now double the size!). If you could follow the procedure to send this file directly to the printer (-oraw) and let me know the result. Thanks. Note that, once again, five different Postscript interpreters from five different vendors all handle the original file without an error, so I assume this is a bug in the printer. Even if we can find a workaround, I would *strongly* encourage you to send a bug report to Toshiba about this - it is disgraceful that so many manufacturers are shipping PS printers that fail to interpret fairly basic Postscript, and I really feel we need to let them know it's just not acceptable! ** Attachment added: "Properly uncompressed version" https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/978120/+attachment/4040928/+files/printout_testpage_really_noncompressed_chris_20140324 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/978120 Title: Toshiba Estudio 230 printer driver bug To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/978120/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 978120] Re: Toshiba Estudio 230 printer driver bug
Tomas, can you try this one, too, please - same procedure. FWIW, I'm expecting this to fail in the same way as the previous one. ** Attachment added: "Cut down file" https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/978120/+attachment/4040998/+files/printout_testpage_really_noncompressed_chris_20140324_2 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/978120 Title: Toshiba Estudio 230 printer driver bug To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/978120/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 978120] Re: Toshiba Estudio 230 printer driver bug
Hrm, that's not a surprise, but it is a pain. I need to give this some thought. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/978120 Title: Toshiba Estudio 230 printer driver bug To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/978120/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 978120] Re: Toshiba Estudio 230 printer driver bug
Tomas, Can you give this one a try, and tell us how it behaves, please? Thanks ** Attachment added: "Uncompressed file with no ttf font" https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/978120/+attachment/4043114/+files/printout_testpage_noncompressed_chris_nottf_20140325.ps -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/978120 Title: Toshiba Estudio 230 printer driver bug To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/978120/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 978120] Re: Toshiba Estudio 230 printer driver bug
So, it is *definitely* to do with how ps2write emits Type42/TrueType fonts - that's a pain. As I said before, what ps2write does is slightly ls odd for this, but it *totally* standard Postscript. Anyway, can you try this one, too, please? Depending on the result of this, I can make a recommendation to Till about a workaround ** Attachment added: "printout_testpage_noncompressed_chris_nottf_20140326.ps" https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/978120/+attachment/4044333/+files/printout_testpage_noncompressed_chris_nottf_20140326.ps -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/978120 Title: Toshiba Estudio 230 printer driver bug To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/978120/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1366743] Re: Ubuntu 14.04 only prints LibreOffice Docs
As the file you have is PDF, you should be trying: lpr -P -o psdebug .pdf or lp -d -o psdebug .pdf If that works, let us know. If not, you need to follow the instructions starting here: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DebuggingPrintingProblems#Getting_the_data_which_would_go_to_the_printer And then that should give you a Poscript file which, hopefully you can then use the instructions to send unfiltered to the printer. If the printer does not print, then attach that Postscript file here, and we can hopefully start the (usually lengthy!) process of debugging it. OTOH, if sending the file unfiltered works (unlikely!) , tell us that, too. Finally, once you've done all that, as a workaround, you can do: lpadmin -p -o pdftops-renderer-default=pdftops and try printing. Again let us know whether that works, doesn't work, or whatever. Chris -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1366743 Title: Ubuntu 14.04 only prints LibreOffice Docs To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups/+bug/1366743/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 978120] Re: Toshiba Estudio 230 printer driver bug
Frank, We've made changes to address problems with Konica-Minolta printers, but you may have found another problem. We know how to track these problems down, but they take a lot of time and effort (and paper!) on the part of the users as well as us, and so far, no one has seemed willing to see the process through to a conclusion. If I had direct access to these printers, things would be much quicker, but that's not really practical, unfortunately. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/978120 Title: Toshiba Estudio 230 printer driver bug To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/978120/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 978120] Re: Toshiba Estudio 230 printer driver bug
> Does this info help to narrow down the problem ? No, it does not. If you run the test I posted in comment #44 and report the results, that *would* help narrow down the problem. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/978120 Title: Toshiba Estudio 230 printer driver bug To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/978120/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 978120] Re: Toshiba Estudio 230 printer driver bug
So, how are you printing the PS file in post #44 if not with the lpr command? -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/978120 Title: Toshiba Estudio 230 printer driver bug To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/978120/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 978120] Re: Toshiba Estudio 230 printer driver bug
Opening the file in Document Viewer and printing it from there is completely useless in context because it just goes through the CUPS filters, which I specifically said we needed to avoid for this test. Your original problem, as reported, came about as a result of changing the CUPS Postscript generation from a Poppler based solution to a Ghostscript based solution - this was done to allow future use of high fidelity color reproduction, and some other features available in Ghostscript that were not going to be available in Poppler in the near future. As often happens with such a change, a few teething troubles have come up, hence Till allowed a fallback to the the Poppler tools while we work through them. The: "lpadmin -p -o pdftops-renderer-default=pdftops" setting is that fallback - it does not solve anything, at best it works around the problem. I am trying to establish what needs done to get the Ghostscript output compatible with your printer, so sending a file to the printer via CUPS with the poppler based filter in force does nothing to help me (or, ultimately, yourself!). *PLEASE*, when I give instructions for testing, do not ignore them - I write them for a reason... -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/978120 Title: Toshiba Estudio 230 printer driver bug To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/978120/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 978120] Re: Toshiba Estudio 230 printer driver bug
Jacques, Sorry, but I don't see anywhere above that you confirmed that the test I asked for in post #44 worked for you. In fact, you said (post #51): 'So I do not need to do "lpr -P -oraw ko-nodebug-cut001.ps", since there is no problem' To me, that sounds like you didn't use lpr, but some other method, which is why I asked for clarification of how you printed the output. Sounds like there been some miscommunication, so if you ran the lpr test, and it worked okay, then I think we have all we need. I will ping Till tomorrow, and we'll get these Toshiba printers added to the "exceptions list" of printers that can't use the compression filter(s) in Postscript. Hopefully he can get a cups update out in the near future. Once that happens, you will need to do reset the cups filter to the default - I think this does it: lpadmin -p printer -R pdftops-renderer-default -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/978120 Title: Toshiba Estudio 230 printer driver bug To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/978120/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 978120] Re: Toshiba Estudio 230 printer driver bug
Laurent, If you follow Till's instructions above, and do: lpadmin -p printer -R pdftops-renderer-default lpadmin -p printer -o psdebug-default=true Then do whatever you did in post #43 to capture the data being sent to the printer, and then post it here again. Then I can check the result is what we want/expect. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/978120 Title: Toshiba Estudio 230 printer driver bug To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-filters/+bug/978120/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
