Tim Waugh wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Apr 2000, Bryan Meredith wrote:
>
> > This shouldn't matter - the guest driver will realise that it only has a
> > plain ol' parallel port and so "shouldn't" try any funny business with
> > it.
>
> On the other hand, it won't be able to use Zip drives, Freecom drives,
> Backpack drives, etc etc.
>
> My personal opinion is that it's a better idea to emulate the _port_, not
> the peripheral.
>
Thats how I feel about it as well. There is little to be gained by pretending
to have storage on the other side of a pretend parallel port.
>
> On the other hand, having a virtual printer makes it easy to catch the
> output in a text file, which can only be a good thing. (But this could be
> done just as easily with some logic in a virtual parallel port..)
>
> Tim.
> */
News Update!!!!!
If I select a postscript printer (under win95 running as a guest) I can turn
on text only transmission from the driver. This makes it trivial to send this
plain text to ghostscript!
I have the emulation done. The driver(s) (I've tried a few - generic/text
only , laserjet III thingy PS, IBM thingy PS) all transmit through the port
with little or no problem. So, just got to put the caught bytes where I want
them!
Bryan.
PS.
I haven't tried a binary output driver yet ie HP Deskjet cause I can't get
the cdrom to work under win95 as a guest. I'll attack this after I make an
ALPHA release in the next couple of days. BTW, where should I send the
patch??? Kevin - do you want it as it is BOCHS that I'm playing with? I can
post it here but it is a little off topic (until it is ported to plex86 that
is!)
