On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 7:58 AM, Ian Jackson wrote:
> --- poppler/PSOutputDev.cc.orig 2011-08-18 02:35:01.000000000 -0400
> +++ poppler/PSOutputDev.cc 2011-08-18 02:35:22.000000000 -0400
> @@ -117,7 +117,7 @@
> " /PageSize exch def",
> " /ImagingBBox null def",
> " /Policies 1 dict dup begin /PageSize 3 def end def",
> - " { /Duplex true def } if",
> + " { /Duplex false def } if",
> " currentdict end setpagedevice",
> " } {",
> " pop pop",
>
> I don't think this is right. If I have configured my printer to do
> duplex, this would force it to simplex for this document.
>
> The correct behaviour is simply not to mess with this at all. I can
> see no reason for anything generating PS output to do so, and frankly
> I think it's mind-boggling that this code is in Poppler at all.
Well, xpdf is old and poppler was simply forked from xpdf, so it kept
all the old legacy cruft.
> The right patch is probably this:
>
> " /PageSize exch def",
> " /ImagingBBox null def",
> " /Policies 1 dict dup begin /PageSize 3 def end def",
> - " { /Duplex true def } if",
> " currentdict end setpagedevice",
> " } {",
>
> And that is what I plan to test.
Agreed. I'm not that familiar with postscript duplexing, so that was
just my best guess.
Best wishes,
Mike
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
