I quickly read this link -- it appears they have binary queues and
ascii queues (which is a reasonable solution).
For document (spooling) printers, LPR is a MUCH better idea -- it
should have a byte count somewhere to give a confirmation to job
integrity.
Microsoft did a non-spooling LPR implementation several years
ago -- not sure what they're doing now, but it submit a job with a
very big byte count, and then drops off the net.
Also, with LPR you should have access to lpq/lprm commands -- with port 9100,
you often have only SNMP access to your box (if it supports that).
Of course, with page printers which don't spool, it really doesn't make
much of a difference -- it prints the bytes coming in...
Marty Leisner
Rick Cochran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on Tue, 28 Oct 2003 12:16:28 EST
> Most printers will spew pages of jibberish if you send binary
PostScript via
> port 9100 unless it has been TBCP encoded.
>
> Somebody just reminded me that some printer manufacturers provide lpr
queues
> which are capable of dealing with binary PostScript. For example,
> http://h20015.www2.hp.com/en/document.jhtml?lc=en&docName=bpj05969&cc=us
>
> What are the other pros and cons of using lpr vs port 9100 to send
print jobs to
> printers?
>
> -Rick
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
YOU MUST BE A LIST MEMBER IN ORDER TO POST TO THE LPRNG MAILING LIST
The address you post from MUST be your subscription address
If you need help, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (or lprng-requests
or lprng-digest-requests) with the word 'help' in the body. For the impatient,
to subscribe to a list with name LIST, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with: | example:
subscribe LIST <mailaddr> | subscribe lprng-digest [EMAIL PROTECTED]
unsubscribe LIST <mailaddr> | unsubscribe lprng [EMAIL PROTECTED]
If you have major problems, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word
LPRNGLIST in the SUBJECT line.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
