CUPS 1.0 Enters The World 265
Well, it's basically a completely new printing system based on the Internet Printing Protocol ("IPP") that supports PostScript and non-PostScript printers and a variety of different file formats to make your life easier.
CUPS provides all of the normal printing commands ("lpr", "lp", etc.) - you still use "lpr" to print from Netscape, etc. However, these commands take on a new life with CUPS - instead of bringing up an application everytime you want to print, you can print most images, PDF files, etc. directly. CUPS figures out the type of file and runs any necessary filters to format it for the printer. Have a file that CUPS doesn't handle? No problem, just add a filter and CUPS will handle it, for any printer you have.
Printer drivers are provided for PostScript and HP PCL based printers. We're hoping that the filters provided with CUPS (including a PostScript RIP based on GNU GhostScript) will encourage independent developers and printer manufacturers like EPSON to start developing drivers that use CUPS. Only time will tell.
CUPS can be downloaded from our website at cups.org and is provided under the terms of the GNU General Public License. Commercial printer drivers based on CUPS are available from our main website. "
Not a lot different (Score:1)
Just a question (Score:1)
Re:Amazing (Score:1)
Re:Nice.. but it fails DFSG. (Score:1)
1. Free Redistribution No. Cups does NOT allow the name CUPS to be used in any redistribution of the software. Trademark law covers variations of a name as well. Therefore, the product known as CUPS is not redistributable as CUPS.
2. Source Code
Yes, source code is provided. 3. Derived Works Dependant on whether or not the work is non-free. For this assessment, we will assume that all modifications are free (in compliance with GPL. Yes.
4. Integrity of the source No restrictions on this aspect. Yes, it passes.
5. No discrimination against persons or groups The release does not violate this clause.
6. No Discrimination against fields of endeavor None, however the moment a binary only patch is made to the official GPL'd package, the entire GPL'dness of the product is violated.
7. Distribution of License The program is NOT REDISTRIBUTABLE under the same license , as a different license exists for those who wish to remain closed sourced in API development
8. Not a debian specific license License is blanket.
9. License must not contaminate software License does not contaminate. 10. Example licenses License is GPL
Analysis: While this does tread on shaky areas of the GPL, it is clear that this program does violate the DFSG and the Debian Social Contract. The point of contention lies with the 7th and 1st law of the DFSG, where the 1st law is conflicted by disallowing of the same name (which covers blanketed through the system, much like a patent) of the subsequent patches, and the 7th law, which states that the PROGRAM must be redistributable under the same license. The inclusion of the Binary license and the program's redistribution under this seperate, GPL exclusive license violates the policy of the Debian social contract. Jarrod K. Henry
Re:But wait, there's more! (Score:1)
As far as I know, there are laws in the United States preventing the facsimile of unsolicited advertisements. I don't know if this law only applies to telephone networks, but it seems to me that government types wouldn't bother to make such a distinction.
Summary: I think net-based spam faxes would probably be prohibited by this law (if it exists in the first place).
---
chahast at pangaea dot dhs dot org
Re:Useless? (Score:1)
Re:Debian does that already (Score:2)
Using magicfilter, to print, say, a JPEG on a DeskJet 550C you do the following sets of conversions:
JPEG -> PPM (using djpeg)
PPM -> PostScript (using ppmtops)
PostScript -> dj550c (using GhostScript)
Magicfilter do these automatically by looking at the output for each conversion stage.
Re:Strange terms... (Score:1)
Re:I'm not sure I like this "binary licence" polic (Score:1)
Re:Licencing Issues (Score:1)
Does that mean *all* printer drivers have to be GPL? What if the company doesn't want to release the source? I don't see how it would encourage companies to release more printer drivers.
Re:It's called the hidden PRINTER$ share (Score:1)
You're thinking of EMF, Enhanced Meta-File. The unfortunate thing there is that it does not play well with PCL on the higher-end LaserJet printers. At least, in all of my testing, it didn't.
Otherwise, you're quite correct.
By the way, one of the annoying thing about Windows client printing is that the drivers are pulled down with each print job. You'd think someone would come up with some way of checking the version or something to save network traffic... oh well!
--
QDMerge [rmci.net] 0.21!
Re:Strange terms... (Score:1)
Re:JetDirects & Linux DON'T WORK (Score:1)
I'd be interested to know what you are doing to screw things up so horribly. I have used redhat from v4.2 to v6.0 with no problems whatsoever. This is with 1 and 3 port external JetDirects, and the internal JetDirects in HP4 series, HP5 series and HP4000 series printers. That sure does seem to cover most of what is currently in use. For more than just 5 minutes even. I have printed whole users manuals (300-400 pages) all at once with these tools.
ok, wow, this is almost cool.... (Score:1)
What I don't know is, how widely supported is this? Has an companies with linux or unix distro's jumped on the bandwagon? I guess maybe we should take a wait and see approach.
-- Moondog
Re:Xerox Ethernet? (Score:1)
Which was the basis for the Novell IPX protocol, just to add to the things that Xerox never made any money from.
Re:Well it's about time (Score:1)
Re:Got to admit I'm torn... (Score:3)
These companies invest a large ammount of money into software to make their output look as good as it does. This can potentially mean complex (and patented) dithering and colour matching algorithms. Medium end printers instead move this closed code to firmware, along with a PS interpreter and enough RAM and power to handle it, or even (on higher end printers) divide their proprietary code between a dedicated print server and the rest to firmware.
Rudimentary printing is easy, but getting the most out of medium-end (?) printers ends up almost working backwards - you kinda buy the drivers and they come with the hardware to support them.
My point is not that this is good or bad, just that saying that printer vendors must open-source their drivers is to open a whole nother can of worms - is it appropriate for a company to sell closed software that runs on an open platform? I'm still not done eating my last can of worms!
Re:Hello?? Anyone hear of XPRINT? (Score:1)
Re:Experiences with CUPS, and an alternative. (Score:2)
According to the Admin docs, CUPS only listens on the IPP port, and you can set it up to listen to the HTTP port. No mention of LPD, other than to say it can SEND jobs via LPD.
By the way, I am near the end of a (so far) extremely successful implementation of LPRng in a commercial environment. I had a brief correspondence with Patrick Powell, author and current maintainer of LPRng, and he has assured me that I can use LPRng with no charge in a commercial environment, but I haven't seen the actual license... all it says in the README is "Released under the GPL for use in non-commercial environments," which is pretty vague for my taste.
Auditing and dentistry are excellent career choices for people who don't
Re:Client software (Score:1)
Like, uhh, PostScript?
Re:Debian does that already (Score:1)
system is print quality. Documents and web pages
print pretty good. But if I want photo quality
output, i have to boot to windows.
This is most uncool. Printing graphics in linux on my epson stylus 600 is awful.
WEEEEEEE!!!!!! (Score:1)
IT'S ABOUT TIME!!!
UNIX printing has always struck me as a total relic. I can see how it was appropriate years ago when everyone printed text and printers didn't need drivers, etc., but in today's printing world something more advanced was needed.
Hopefully, this is it
MoNsTeR
Re:No, it doesn't (Re:Nice.. but it fails DFSG.) (Score:1)
I wasn't saying that NDA printer drivers should or would be part of the GPL'd version. Some distributions would choose to ship all the free (beer) printer drivers with the free (speech) version of the program, some wouldn't. This would not compromise the free version of the program.
As far as not being able to called a forked version of CUPS CUPS, it's their choice and it doesn't violate the DFSG. They want to retain control of the product called "CUPS", and that's their right.
Another example of this is the Open Sound System. The linux kernel ships with a version of OSS called OSS/Lite. OSS/Lite is the GPL version of OSS, which isn't free in any sense of the word. However neither the existance of OSS, nor the existance of binary only drivers for OSS/Lite mean that Debian can't ship OSS/Lite. I have a SBLive on my computer, and as you may know, the SBlive driver is binary only. For obvious reasons, Debian does not include the driver to this card as part of it's distribution. However I was able to download this driver and use it with the kernel that ships with Debian because the OSS/Lite code is GPL and therefore DFSG compliant.
To use your example of QT, the QPL is DFSG compliant. KDE could not be included in Debian because there was no free version of QT. There was a commercial version and there was a pseudo open source version. There was no version of QT which met their standards. However, when QT 2.0 came out, it was released under a license which was basically the GPL with a clause saying you can pay Troll Tech to write commercial programs, and it was accepted into Debian. Take a look at Debian's ftp server if you don't believe me. You will find Qt [debian.org] right there.
Re:Got to admit I'm torn... (Score:1)
You may say that windows has buggy drivers, but there's not a current desktop printer out there that won't work under win32.
-Chris
Let's raise our cups in a toast to the project! (Score:2)
Re:IP and printers (Score:1)
Re:Who is this different from RH Printfilters (Score:1)
AFAIK most printers who isn't a matrix printer or similair (line printers and such) uses PCL and/or PS.
And LPD/LPR is a pain to setup. Printing is one of Linux's real problem before it goes out to the newbies who wants to run it.
Re:Score 1, Interesting?? (Score:1)
From nowhere? (Score:2)
Whenever someone newly installs Linux, and then asks me about setting up the printer, I ask, ``Does it do PostScript?'' *Blank stare*, then I start to whistle and change the subject.
All that's changed now!
Re:Let's raise our cups in a toast to the project! (Score:1)
> get Adobe to give us some Linux versions of
> their tools, life might be (almost) perfect.
Adobe tools suck rocks. Their acroread is poorly
implemented in a lot of ways. They patent their
standards (like pdf) to prevent others from being
able to make pdfs without paying the man.
They embrace and extend their proprietary standards (PS and PDF) to keep open source tools
from being able to work with full functionality.
I do a lot of PS hacking with open source tools,
and Adobe has about the worst attitude towards
open source PS hackers as you can get.
Not a new idea but still cool (Score:1)
One thing it did not have, however, was the ability to have custom printer filters applied by a printer server. In other words, I wanted to be able to send the job from a client workstation to a central printer server, have a custom PostScript-based coverpage (with the printee's username on it) prepended to the print job. Since it used plain ole lpd, this was not possible. It was only possible to do printer filters on the client workstation, not the print server. We wanted to print out a cool coverpage with our schools logo and the username in a nice helvetica font but could never find something to do the job. Perhaps CUPS has this figured out?
It's very unfortunate that people still insist on printing stuff out, but if they have to do it, might as well do it right! chris
PPR - Another modern print system (Score:2)
Re:JetDirects & Linux DON'T WORK (Score:1)
Use LPRng rather than Redhat's stock lpd - for a serious print server you want all the extra features LPRng offers, such as being able to send postscript directly to port 9100 on the Jetdirect card, web management (with lpinfo), the ability to have one printcap file that works across all print servers, support for installation on most commercial Unices, etc... LPRng comes on the Applications CD that comes with RedHat, is GPL'd for non-commercial uses, and is free for commercial implementations, but I'm unsure of other restrictions besides price for commercial uses. Anyway, if the license was good enough for the Debian group, it's good enough for me.
_______________________________________________
Auditing and dentistry are excellent career choices for people who don't
Re:JetDirects & Linux DON'T WORK (Score:1)
Auditing and dentistry are excellent career choices for people who don't
Re:Score 1, Interesting?? (Score:1)
Printcap tweak (Score:1)
Re:Got to admit I'm torn... (Score:1)
On a historical, semi-ironical note, wasn't it a proprietary printer driver that sent RMS on the GNU trip in the early 80's? :-)
---
Re:The Right Way to do Printing (Score:2)
That's what the XPRINT extension supports; it then hands the resulting output to whatever print spooler system you have.
Re:Xerox Ethernet? (Score:3)
Re:Windows Printing System (Score:2)
The XPRINT extension for X11R6.1 and later follows a similar model - there are some added calls to start and end pages, select a particular printer, etc., but most of the drawing can be done with Xlib calls (or, if one can get an some toolkit for X to use a particular X display for particular calls, with higher-level toolkit calls)
XPRINT is also similar, in that the X Print server to which you connect generates PCL, PostScript, or whatever page description language, and hands it to your system's print spooler.
UNIX print spooler systems may also have their own mechanisms for turning various file formats into commands for a particular printer, e.g. filters to turn PostScript into rasters for printers that don't support PostScript.
If the X Print server you connect to is on a local machine, printing would work that way with XPRINT, although there's no mechanism for automatically copying printer drivers from the server (it may, after all, not be running the same OS as your machine, or, even if it is, it may not have the same instruction set; how well does that copied print driver stuff work with, say, an Alpha server running NT and x86 clients running NT or W9x?).
If the server's running an X Print server, it could also be done by connecting to an X Print server on that machine, and sending it the X and XPRINT requests to draw stuff over the wire.
Re:JetDirects & Linux DON'T WORK (Score:2)
Newer versions of the JetDirect firmware have working TCP/IP stacks, which may explain all the wise-asses who wonder what "you're doing wrong".
The easiest solution for those of us unlucky enough to be saddled with bad firmware is to switch to LPRng and, following the advice in the LPRng-HOWTO, use the printer's port 9100 as a direct link to the print engine.
At our site, we had no end of problems with HP printers crashing, locking up, and loosing jobs whenever two people tried to print at once. One day, I bit the LPRng bullet (and even installed "magicfilter" while I was at it). The configuration was a little work, but it was worth the effort. Finally, we have a printing system supporting Linux clients (using both LPRng and legacy "lpr") and Windows clients (via a Samba server acting as an LPRng client) that seems to work flawlessly.
Of course, all our printers are PostScript, so we don't have to worry so much about this newfangled CUPS stuff.
Re:LINUX NEVER CRASHES - but that's not the point (Score:2)
Besides, I fail to see how CUPS is much different from the rhs_printfilters shipped with every RedHat, or the similar filters Debian use. You can print almost anything directly, if you don't care about having some control with how eg. a TIFF is put on your paper (functionality which the Gimp will easily provide).
LPRng is nice though. It's much more fault tolerant than the standard lpr package. It puts a lot of effort into working with printers that aren't exactly acting as the RFC suggests. Too bad about the crappy licence.
Re:Got to admit I'm torn... (Score:2)
I suppose printers could use ghostscript, but for the unwashed masses, being a "ghostscript printer" won't be a convincing selling point.
Re:Blargh. (Score:2)
Anybody know whether it's possible to run an X Print server on a headless machine (i.e., a machine with no display on which an X display server could draw)?
XPRINT doesn't require you to do that, as far as I can tell; all an X Print server does is accept X drawing requests, generate page description language output to draw that stuff on paper, and then hand to the print spooler system a file containing that output. You could, as far as I can tell, run the X Print server on your desktop machine, and have it hand the file to the spooler system, which could send it to the print server.
If you're running the program doing the printing on a server, that program would have to talk to an X Print server somewhere, possibly on that machine, or possible on some other machine.
This is why Windows is (was?) easier. (Score:2)
Re:beowulf (Score:3)
Re:No src? (Score:2)
Re:That's because you don't support OSS (Score:2)
Uh, then buy a postscript printer, where they move the closed code to firmware.
I suppose that last can of worms was Open Source operating systems or applications? If you're not done with that one yet I can see why you have the opinion you do. Give it time, you may learn the benefits of OSS some day...
I quite intentionally refrained from expressing my opinion regarding open source, because I wasn't explaining why I don't write fully open source printer drivers.
Re:Strange terms... (Score:3)
I discussed this a little earlier, but thought of a good way to say what I mean, so this gives me the chance to have another go at it.
There are two factors that must be done to get high quality printing. There's the hardware end, which means that if you decide you want a pixel to cover v much area at position x, y, the hardware will actually be able to put the right ammount of ink there and let it dry properly.
The other factor which is as important is deciding where you WANT to put the ink to make a picture look good.
The way the printer market is currently, I would estimate that between half and a third of the R&D resources go into the second element, which is obviously going to be solved in software/firmware (resources, in terms of man-hours, not true for materials, obviously). I don't know if this is true everywhere - this is true for one high-end wide-format printer company I worked for, whose name I feel I shouldn't reveal (though I can't really think of a good reason why not).
See, here's the issue. You have a 150x150 dpi 24bpp image you want to print out on a printer that can handle 1440x720 dpi, 2bpp. Or maybe you can vary the sizes of the dots or use different densities of ink and get 8 bpp or whatever. But either way, you have to perform some deep magic to make what comes out of the paper look like what's on your screen, especially since the way the ink behaves depends on the kind of paper you're printing on. Higher end printers use CCD cameras to calibrate themselves, which also, let-me-tell-you involves some pretty clever hard things.
Consider an alternate model of the printer industry - that the printer companies are selling software bundled with a parallel port dongle which enables it to work. The reality lies at a point inbetween this and "they sell hardware".
If you're business is making and selling software, why should your code be a trade secret? Because your business model relies upon it. I am not aware of business models for pure software development which don't involved closed development somewhere or other. As far as I know most OSS business models treat development as sort of incedental. You make money selling support or something.
It *might* be possible to shift the emphasis to post-sale consumables - special paper and inks, but is this really necessary? Is there no place in this world for commercial software development except for supporting other commercial ventures?
Re:Experiences with CUPS, and an alternative. (Score:3)
As for NULL checks, they aren't always needed, and we've tried to the checks where they aren't needed (or are duplicated) for efficiency... If you've found one missing that needs to be there, please let us know!
Interesting project (Score:2)
I do have one question, though. Instead of distributing an enormous archive of their custom GhostScript, why don't they just contribute their patches back to the GhostScript folks? I would like to test this, but frankly my own printing setup is working just fine, and I don't want to replace the whole thing en masse.
Cheers
-jwb
Re:No, it doesn't (Re:Nice.. but it fails DFSG.) (Score:2)
Except by RMS, who has personally called it free software.
stupid git.
Got to admit I'm torn... (Score:5)
On the other hand, I'm not all that excited about a system that seems to encourage non-free printer drivers. Because that's what this is; the core is free, but large portions of the drivers are probably going to be proprietary.
I know some people will probably say I'm just being a whiny free software person, and maybe I am. But look at where proprietary drivers has gotten, oh, windows. You just can't depend on them. The stability of the GNU/Linux system is something we all trumpet, so why toss that out when it comes to something like your printing?
Then, let's look at experiences so far with proprietary drivers on Linux. My roommate complains all the time about his SBLive driver. It only works with some kernel versions, isn't stable, etc. I know that this isn't the same as kernel modules, but it still makes me nervous.
I'm all for new capabilities for my favorite operating system, but let's not forget the freedom that got us here in the first place. Support those manufacturers who make their specs openly available, and support free software.
--
Ian Peters
Re:beowulf (Score:2)
(more ontopic) This is nice to see, though -- any modern remake of lpr/lpd would be an improvement, and in particular seems a good example of the potential for coexistence between commercial for-profit software and free software -- the architecture is free, and specialized drivers for individual printers can be had for cost. Might not be suitable for home and hackerish uses in that respect, but business environments would lap it up.
Re:Xerox Ethernet? (Score:2)
Indeed? Digital and Intel were involved in the original 3Mb Ethernet? Or were they just involved in producing the 10Mb standard? (Did Xerox have 10Mb Ethernet before the DIX standard came out?)
Yup, as I said.
Debian does that already (Score:3)
I don't see what's so bad about the current printing system other then the lack of drivers. What we really need is more drivers for GhostScript.
Strange terms... (Score:4)
Why don't I just download the code, change it, and not tell anybody?
But wait, there's more! (Score:3)
CUPS and the CUPS logo are the trademark property of Easy Software Products.
Now, they've said the code is GPL, but what about the name? Will I need to send money their way if I want to advertise "NekoLinux comes with CUPS!" or something? Or are they simply protecting the name so that someone else can't also put out a program named CUPS? The later I can live with, but I'm going to get suspicious if it's so the trademark can only be used in "approved" ways without them specifying what an "approved use" is. Some clarification on their website would seem to be in order...
Oh, one other great quote:
The Internet Printing Protocol is an exciting new network protocol that provides a common set of network printing services.
I get suspicious whenever a network protocol is described as "exciting"...
Oh, and one more:
One of the many potential applications of IPP is Internet Facsimile services - you can print a document from any machine in the world to any printer in the world using IPP!
Yikes! Gods help us all...
--
Re:Interesting project (Score:5)
I couldn't get it to talk to my HP LaserJet using JetDirect, even though I can easily contact it using my original printing setup and also via telnet. Oh well, it comes with the source so I guess I could hack on it.
-jwb
Re:Who is this different from RH Printfilters (Score:3)
Second, the RH filters limit the printer support to what is compiled into GhostScript; CUPS allows you to add new drivers without recompiling.
Finally, file filters are a lot easier to deal with in CUPS - it will run multiple filters as needed to get to the "destination format", while the LPR filtering mechanism only runs a single filter.
Re:Interesting project (Score:2)
IP and printers (Score:5)
On the small color end you have the relitively new Tektronix 780, with network features such as:
Built in HTTP server for printer management and set up, FTP server for instand Postscript file upload, SCSI and IDE HD options for job storage as well as buffering space, SNMP, DHCP, and the list goes on. Now to print to one of these small office color machines from Unix, it is recommended that you have your app create a postscript file and have the app FTP the PS file to the printer. Real simple, real fast, very effective. No configuring anything in your OS for printer ports, print servers, or anything..just the specs of your printer to make the post script file. Here at work, we have mounted the printer's HDD to a point on the network where the PS files are automatically saved and printed.
Now on the high end lets look at how Xerox has developed its high end Docutech series. I cannot say enough about the importance the original 1992 Docutech135 has meant to computers in general. It is one of the projects that led Xerox to give us the mouse, the GUI, and ethernet. Moving away from totally cutom gear now that mice and GUI's are a dime a dozen, Xerox moves the central RIP'ing precess and printer control to a nice Sun Ultra 2 (creator 2). Nice move if you ask me. Using SBus's throughput to move paper through a machine 135 times a munite, duplexing, stapleing, binding etc (controlling a printer about the size of a bus in length). Now Xerox writes a SLEW of new apps to controll this printer, and to accept jobs comming in from IPX novell netoworks, Appletalk (handling IPX and appletalk on solaris, Xerox has gonads
Point in hand.. this app, which is aimed for the home small printer user I am assuming, is nothing real majical, and for most commercial users quit insignifigant. Anyway.. sorry about the spelling grammer etc.. i am in a REAL rush.
Bort
Re:Interesting project (Score:5)
The command-line is long enough we all got sick of seeing it over and over...
The install and remove scripts are generated by the "EPM" software in the "epm" directory.
The docos don't say "make install" backs things up, only that the binary distributions do a backup...
For a LaserJet with a JetDirect, use:
lpadmin -p Printer -E -m laserjet.ppd -v socket://ip-address:9100
Re:Strange terms... (Score:2)
After going over the FAQ, I think cups looks like a decent system. It improves the way that printing works, allows for free drivers to be written (they've even got a database for them) and if you're the type who "needs it for REAL work", you can get the proprietary drivers to do it with. Sort of like XFree86's relation to AcceleratedX, but in reverse (since the cups guys are giving the free infrastructure to base everything on) That's a pretty kind thing of a proprietary-software making company to do. Usually those just find ways to lock you in (eg., EVERY system on the network needs to buy our proprietary driver! or.. If you use our package, you can only use OUR drivers!) etc.
Licencing Issues (Score:2)
The relevant clause is this:
CUPS is available under the terms of the Aladdin Free Public License, which means that it is basically free except for commercial distribution.(1)
Does that mean that Cheapbytes wouldn't be able to sell a Stampede CD that contained it? If so, this is going to have a hard time being accepted in the major distros.
(1) I don't think this is the legal text, but the jist, as provided by cups.org
Re:Got to admit I'm torn... (Score:3)
Client software (Score:2)
Modern printing is more than just throwing a stream of data at a printer. When you set up printing in a Windows app, the driver lets you configure dozens of printer-specific options (paper trays, paper types, duplex, halftone settings, etc.) through a series of dialogs.
If CUPS requires a typical user to pass a bunch of command-line options to lp when he wants to run an unusual print job, then it's not going to be the least bit of help at getting Linux/Unix onto more desktops. The ability to print documents without invoking the application is nice, but hardly important to the people who do most of the printing in this world.
I haven't actually tried CUPS yet, so I may be totally off-base here. Actually, I hope I'm wrong, because printing is one of my biggest obstacles to getting Linux into non-geek environments.
Derek
Re:But wait, there's more! (Score:3)
ANYONE can use a trademark name so long as they credit the owner. The purpose of a trademark is to protect the integrity of a name. We're doing that for CUPS for the same reason that Linus trademarked Linux...
As for IPP, look at the available docos on the net. Make your own decision.
As for IPP-based fax, CUPS doesn't come enabled for that. Security is a very big deal for us.
Re:Debian does that already (Score:3)
As for MS Word, we're looking at adapting some of the available conversion programs to work with CUPS.
Finally, how big do you want GhostScript to get? What if you have a dozen printers and are printing to them all at the same time? Also, GhostScript stinks once you start feeding it images; separating the drivers allows us to write other RIPs like our image file RIP to make printing faster/more efficient.
Experiences with CUPS, and an alternative. (Score:4)
Trying to figure out why, I started looking at the source... and discovered that in many places they lack even elementary error checking. NULL pointers are passed to functions that don't check for it, system calls are made with no return value tests, etc.
Now, as I mentioned, it's quite plausible that they fixed the specific bugs I ran into (e.g. when I tried to enable a printer class, instead of a specific printer, it died). It's also possible that the code examples I saw were an aberration, and that most of the project has much better quality code.
Still, I was very taken aback; remember, this is code that is implementing a network service directly -- sloppiness often leads to security holes.
Based on this experience, I instead chose to use LPRng: http://www.astart.com/lprng/LPRng.html [astart.com]. It took more effort to set up, and didn't work "magically" out of the box the way CUPS did (I had to install a version of apsfilter myself, for example), but in the end it did most of the same things -- and didn't crash all the time.
Unfortunately, LPRng has "yet another wacky license", which they claim is "Open Source", but which may have restrictions on commercial use. But if you're interested in CUPS, you should check out LPRng too.
Re:Licencing Issues (Score:2)
Re:Who is this different from RH Printfilters (Score:2)
Whew, glad I can finally stop printing everything with a fake printing system now.
What options does CUPS offer that you can't put in a postscript file or pass to lpr? Granted the feedback could be better than "the printer isn't working" when something goes wrong, but that's about all I'd like to improve.
Second, the RH filters limit the printer support to what is compiled into GhostScript; CUPS allows you to add new drivers without recompiling.
This is a technical plus, but not a huge practical plus. GS 5.10 takes up a little over a meg on my hard drive, and is updateable with one command.
Finally, file filters are a lot easier to deal with in CUPS - it will run multiple filters as needed to get to the "destination format", while the LPR filtering mechanism only runs a single filter.
This is factually incorrect. Take a look at the print filters system in Red Hat (or Debian, or anyone else) sometime. If there's a jpgtopnm filter and a pnmtops filter installed, you don't need a jpgtops filter to be able to print through ghostscript.
The only serious problem with Linux printing is the lack of ghostscript drivers for some printers... but since this CUPS only seems to have ps and pcl drivers, we'll need to use ghostscript for 90% of it's printer support for some time.
Granted, CUPS looks like an improvement, but not a huge one.
Re:But wait, there's more! (Score:2)
That's what passwords and allow/deny filters are for. Just put the people you want to fax to/from in your allow/deny, or give your friends the password for your printserver... voila! phoneless faxing!
---
Re:No, that's wrong.. (Score:2)
http://technet.microsoft.com/cdonline/default-f
[snip]
Windows NT supports true remote printing. When Windows NT and Windows 95 clients connect to a correctly configured Windows NT print server, the printer driver is automatically installed on the client computer. If you install a newer printer driver on the server, Windows NT client computers automatically download the newer printer driver. However, if you install a newer printer driver for Windows 95 clients on a print server, users running Windows 95 must manually update the printer driver to have the newer version copied to their computers
[snip]
You just don't *see* it happen.
Krakken
Re:Interesting project (Score:2)
Sigh. If I'm really interested, I'll join your mailing list.
Cheers
-jwb
Re:Strange terms... (Score:2)
You can use the code, as is, for free.
You can modify the code, for free, provided you "pay me" by releasing your changes back into the community. (If the changes are substantial and worth folding into the main tree, I'll license the changes from you so I can re-release them under the terms below.) It's important to note that this is a pure GPL license.
If you really, really want to keep your changes "secret," you can pay me in hard cash instead of published code. I prefer code. The licensing rates will make it clear that I prefer code. But if you're unwilling to consider a GPL license, I'll work with you if that's what it takes to keep you from using a totally closed solution. I'm tempted to call it "BSD-for-a-fee" licensing, but that would simply confuse people.
In any case, I don't expect to make money from my OSS projects.... but I *do* expect to make contacts for bigger projects and higher rates. Even without any projects getting beyond early beta, I've found the experience of working full-time on a project has already paid profound dividends on my current (for-profit) job.
Hello?? Anyone hear of XPRINT? (Score:3)
This is a little late; UNIX already has a common printing system. AFAIK, CUPS isn't network based, it's not as flexible as XPRINT, and it's not an industry standard. Granted, Linux hasn't standardised on XPRINT. But maybe it should--and maybe it would be better if you extended XFree86 to support XPRINT, and then wrote an lpr program that would use XPRINT instead, to encourage people to start using the UNIX standard, making things more interoperable with UNIX systems.
Here's the bottom few lines:
- What's the point if I can't run a program on my Solaris/Be/RiscOS/Windows/Mac/anything-with-Xlib box and print to a printer connected to my Linux box without using potentially unsupported print protocols, and do this all from Japan, printing in California?
- What's the point if there's already a common UNIX printing system?
- What's the point if I can get the same functionality and more by combining lots of small programs in creative ways?
- What's the point, full stop?
Anyway, I don't have the time, but let me just say, before anyone flames me, read the docs for XPRINT, and for that matter, X11. All the standards already exist, and they're open standards. Someone PLEASE write an XPRINT module for XFree. Then printing in Linux will be easy.
It's called the hidden PRINTER$ share (Score:3)
There is a hidden share on the NT box called PRINTER$ (The doller sign makes it hidden, like IPC$.) In this directory, printer drivers for exported printers are put there (If you have the drivers available when you set up the machine)
The problem is most of the drivers nowadays are not OEMSETUP.INF style but SETUP.EXE style which the clients can't/won't install on their own. That is why you can get your HP laserjet to pull it's drivers, but not your HP Deskjet.
As for the Windows "Meta-language" Question, It's true there is one and it is actually rather good. I think it's called RMF (Raw Meta Format) or something. Basicly it takes the same GDI functions that you use for screen output, and writes them onto a "virtual screen" to be rendered on a printer. The virtual screen keeps track of what was done to it, and "plays it back" to the printer driver. That is why windows always knows how long you are going to have to wait for the print out - it's actually already pre-visulized the whole operation in it's head.
GPL is not exclusive (Score:3)
We're all in a church group preparing meals for the homeless and invalid. We all donate food with the understanding that it will be given away for free to anyone to asks for it. Bill Gates could get a free meal from our group, if he wants it.
Bob, a local restaurant owner, offers to give us excess food. This is perfectly fine food, but he can't use leftovers in his four-star restaurant.
Would you claim that you can't use Bob's food because he "discriminates" against his customers by charging them for their meals? Or would you recognize that Bob isn't a single-dimensional caricature of a wild-eyed zealot and he doesn't have to follow an arbitrary standard in all things? Hell, would you even consider the possibility that Bob really wants to serve meals to the homeless and his restaurant is simply a way to acquire and pay for the high quality food for the homeless?
Speaking for myself, my reaction when seeing responses like yours is that the GPL isn't worth the trouble. IIRC the BSD license is still DSFG free but is a lot more tolerant of pragmatic coexistence with unenlightened businesses.
Re:Useless? (Score:2)
To what extent does the XPRINT extension provide that (at least for X applications), and in what ways doesn't it provide that? ("In what ways doesn't it provide that" could include ways in which X itself is deficient - and which might be ways in which apps don't have good enough display support as well.)
That'd work, of course, only if you have an X Print Server available, which not all UNIX systems necessarily do.
This is obviously advertising but.. (Score:2)
Also, could someone point me to a link which describes the win32 printing system? How does applications send data to the printer driver? Is it a generic format? If so, couldn't this data be passed over the network to a remote printer driver?
I think there is too much things to be improved in this area.. but my knowledge on printing systems is close to null..
Re:Boycott Printers!!! (Score:2)
When I was working at Cook County Hospital as a programmer trainee, I was asked to print their inventory proof sheet for the daily transactions. It was about 50 pages of 132-column text on fanfold paper (remember that?) By mistake, I coded:
// PRINTER
instead of whatever the Hell I was suppoed to do. I remember that SYSOUT because, about an hour later, I got a call from Operations:
"'scuse me, sir, but we have 6 boxes of punched-cards you generated just now. What do you want us to do with them?"
"I'll call you back later," I said.
I told my trainer. He laughed for about 20 minutes, then said:
"You'd better not call them back. I'll take care of it for you."
I'm surprised they didn't make me put all the confetti back in...
CUPS is GPL, GNU GhostScript is Aladdin... (Score:2)
Just thought I'd clear that up, as most people seemed to have it confused...
Re:Nice.. but it fails DFSG. (Score:2)
With the exception of the GNU GhostScript code (which is owned by Aladdin) we wholly own the CUPS code. We can distribute CUPS under any license we choose.
The DFSG applies to a software distribution and a single license, not to all distributions and licenses that a package may have. Another example is GhostScript, for which there is a non-DFSG version (Aladdin GhostScript 5.50) and DFSG versions (GNU GhostScript up to 5.10).
Score 1, Interesting?? (Score:2)
I'm not sure how they'll deal with third-party modifications to the code, though.
Daniel
Re:But wait, there's more! (Score:2)
For the record, and as far as our legal understanding goes, any person, company, etc. can use a trademarked name so long as they are identifying the product that is trademarked and provide the appropriate notice stating who owns the trademark. E.g.:
GnomoPrint CUPS(tm) 2000
Copyright 1999 by Gnomo Software, Inc.
CUPS is the trademark property of Easy Software Products.
Re:Hello?? Anyone hear of XPRINT? (Score:3)
Define "printing system". Section 1.1 of the X Print Service Extension Library documentation says
CUPS is a "print subsystem such as System V lp or BSD lp[sic]"; XPRINT generates stuff to feed to a printer, and a print subsystem such as the SV or BSD one, or CUPS, queues up that stuff when handed it, and feeds it to a printer.
So XPRINT isn't enough to do printing; you need a print spooling system, as well as a system for actually generating a file containing instructions to a printer telling it what marks to put on a sheet of paper (or what stuff to send over a fax modem, or whatever). CUPS is, among other things, a print spooling system; an X Print Server will probably assume that a print spooling system exists and that it should hand print jobs to that system.
You could debate whose job it should be to turn printer-independent drawing instructions into the appropriate drawing instructions for a particular printer; if somebody wants to argue that XPRINT should do that, they'll have to demonstrate that it's OK to require all programs that print more than just plain text to be linked with Xlib and company, and to be run in an environment that has X Print Servers handy (be prepared to have to respond to people who do not want to be required to do that, and may even have good reasons not to want that).
Oh, and I don't consider it a "UNIX standard" until I can rely on it being on all UNIX systems, even if I'm, say, in an environment where all the UNIX systems are headless servers.
I did (which I was able to do, because I happen to have Frame Maker; has anybody converted the various X specs written in Frame into a format that those who don't have Frame can read, and made them publicly available?), and they specifically indicate that XPRINT isn't a print spooling system.
What's missing? The XFree86 3.3.5 release notes [xfree86.org] say
Re:722c (Score:3)
Patrick Barrett
Yebyen@adelphia.net
Re:From nowhere? (Score:2)
Re:Xerox Ethernet? (Score:2)
Re:Hello?? Anyone hear of XPRINT? (Score:2)
Text layout, for example, is done on the display as well; are X's facilities sufficient for display but not for printing, or does X need to be improved (or replaced...) for display as well?
Re:Useless? (Score:2)
However, it doesn't do anything for providing apps with printer support like Windows, Mac, Amiga, OS/2 and basically every non-Unix OS do. It doesn't help apps determine what fonts are ok, it doesn't help them create the output, it doesn't give them a working font model, font metrics, the kind of info in afm files, etc.
How about calling it... (Score:2)
--
Man is most nearly himself when he achieves the seriousness of a child at play.
Re:Xerox Ethernet? (Score:2)
Correct.
(Or, rather, he and Dave Boggs invented it; I have the impression Metcalfe isn't the sole inventor.)
Re:Nice.. but it fails DFSG. (Score:2)
Re:Isn't this the same as Solaris' print filters? (Score:2)
The main difference is that the driver-application interface is richer (you can actually find out what the printer supports) and you can add different backend interfaces (i.e. a new network protocol, serial ports, etc.), other drivers, etc. without a lot of work.
Also, since IPP is the remote printing interface and CUPS maintains the available printers on the network, you don't have to administer the client machines, and the clients can actually send options to the servers.
Re:Xerox Ethernet? (Score:2)
RFC 791, "INTERNET PROTOCOL, DARPA INTERNET PROGRAM, PROTOCOL SPECIFICATION", says that it was "prepared for Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency Information Processing Techniques Office, 1400 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22209, by Information Sciences Institute, University of Southern California, 4676 Admiralty Way, Marina del Rey, California 90291", and RFC 793 "TRANSMISSION CONTROL PROTOCOL, DARPA INTERNET PROGRAM, PROTOCOL SPECIFICATION" says the same thing.
I have the impression Cerf wasn't the sole author; I think Jon Postel, for one, was involved, and RFC 793 says
so presumably Robert(?) Kahn was involved as well.
In any case, as you note, Bob Metcalfe didn't invent TCP/IP.
Re:Debian does that already (Score:2)
Re:All my licensing comments.. (Score:2)
Trademarks protect names from getting "diluted". You can use the name all you like, so long as you are referencing *the* CUPS distribution. If you have a derivative then you just have to modify the name accordingly.
Please, think about Linux - it is trademarked but used regularly at part of the name of many Linux distributions.
Don't look a gift horse in the mouth (Score:3)
CUPS uses filters for various filetypes. So hopefully I can get better quality for massive graphics than I can with postscript which basically vector-based from what I understand.
If CUPS is better and the license is right, then it should become the standard for GNU systems.
I am not sure about the Internet Printing thing. Isn't that what Xerox is doing? I guess it would be neat to print my file at my Uncle's house... kind of like faxing, huh?
The internet is making everything weird.
--