Page 2 of 2

Re: Which old Puppies would be best for different uses?

Posted: Fri Jul 22, 2022 5:22 pm
by rcrsn51

@greengeek I looked at CUPS-PDF in Tahrpup and the problem appears to be with its version of Ghostscript. As a test, I dropped in an older version of GS and it worked.

In Bionicpup, CUPS-PDF works correctly and can be used as a preview for n-up printing in PeasyPDF.


Re: Which old Puppies would be best for different uses?

Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2022 7:05 am
by greengeek
rcrsn51 wrote: Fri Jul 22, 2022 5:22 pm

@greengeek I looked at CUPS-PDF in Tahrpup and the problem appears to be with its version of Ghostscript. As a test, I dropped in an older version of GS and it worked.

In Bionicpup, CUPS-PDF works correctly and can be used as a preview for n-up printing in PeasyPDF.

Many thanks. I'm keen to try the older GS trick - is it something I can pull from another puppy? (Any tips appreciated)
I occasionally use Bionic but would be keen to make Tahr work better as I have invested a lot of time into making it my daily driver.
Cheers!


Re: Which old Puppies would be best for different uses?

Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2022 9:52 am
by rcrsn51
greengeek wrote: Sat Jul 23, 2022 7:05 am

Many thanks. I'm keen to try the older GS trick - is it something I can pull from another puppy?

https://www.mediafire.com/file/j2192ghk ... 5.pet/file

But use with caution - it might break other printer-related tasks. This is a 32bit-only package.

BTW, for your test #2 above, try selecting "Fit to Page".


Re: Which old Puppies would be best for different uses?

Posted: Sun Jul 24, 2022 7:09 am
by greengeek
rcrsn51 wrote: Sat Jul 23, 2022 9:52 am

https://www.mediafire.com/file/j2192ghk ... 5.pet/file

But use with caution - it might break other printer-related tasks. This is a 32bit-only package.

Thank you very much! That pet immediately got rid of the "invalid file name" errors I was having when printing to CUPS-PDF. (Tahr32 6.0.6)

Will do some deeper testing over the next few days and report back if I see any negative impacts.

Will try the 'fit-to-page' again too. Was pretty sure I had used that and it had made no difference but I will confirm.

Cheers!


Re: Which old Puppies would be best for different uses?

Posted: Sun Jul 24, 2022 11:07 am
by rcrsn51
greengeek wrote: Sun Jul 24, 2022 7:09 am

Thank you very much! That pet immediately got rid of the "invalid file name" errors I was having when printing to CUPS-PDF. (Tahr32 6.0.6)

CUPS-PDF uses the "ps2pdf" tool to convert the print job stream from Postscript to PDF. It is part of Ghostscript and is clearly broken in Tahrpup's version of GS.

Will do some deeper testing over the next few days and report back if I see any negative impacts.

This is the same version of Ghostcript that I use to print on my everyday Puppy machine. It has worked well for me. But it may depend on the specific printer driver you have. It will also depend on your version of CUPS.

Will try the 'fit-to-page' again too. Was pretty sure I had used that and it had made no difference but I will confirm.

I tested n-up printing with PeasyPDF and the built-in lp command on a bunch of PDFs. There were a few cases where lp could not render the n-up correctly.

However they worked with my 165MB squashfs module of PDF Studio Viewer in the Bullseye Starter Kit.

[Update] I may have solved this by first converting the troublesome PDF into Postscript, then printing it with PeasyPDF. However, it's pretty slow.

You can try this yourself using: pdftops xxx.pdf xxx.ps

Then load the .ps file into PeasyPDF's Print function. Doing a preview using CUPS-PDF also worked.


Re: Which old Puppies would be best for different uses?

Posted: Tue Jul 26, 2022 8:19 am
by greengeek
rcrsn51 wrote: Sun Jul 24, 2022 11:07 am

This is the same version of Ghostcript that I use to print on my everyday Puppy machine. It has worked well for me. But it may depend on the specific printer driver you have. It will also depend on your version of CUPS.

Thanks. Definitely seeing variable results on different pdfs. I will be trying other versions of CUPS-PDF to see what impact that has and will start a thread to discuss the questions i have.
Cheers!


Re: Which old Puppies would be best for different uses?

Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2022 2:14 pm
by tallboy
stevie pup wrote:

At the moment I'm only asking this question out of curiosity, so it's all hypothetical for now, but here we go. As I have a number of machines to play around with it stands to reason they don't all need to be set up to do the same tasks.

I have been in the same situation for many years, but on my day-to-day main PC, I now have two frugal Puppys to choose from, tahrpup64-6.0.6, and EasyPup 4.91.5. Both are modified a little to suit me best. The tahr is set up with VMware for a Windoze-based car manual setup, but I cannot find the necessary files for watching mp5 videos in my latest Vivaldi browser. The EasyPup is so complete, it has it all, and it is my favorite Puppy! The latest Vivaldi works with mp5, but I have to make the kernel-sources to install VMware. The EasyPup also allow me to make multisession CD-Rs for my stone-age machines, but that is of course slightly out of date now... :D

tallboy


Re: Which old Puppies would be best for different uses?

Posted: Tue Jan 03, 2023 3:29 pm
by wasley51

Hello;
I use EASYPUP 2.3.1 but would like to upgrade to the last version before it was retired. Do you know where I can find an iso for this and what version?

Also, let me know if you think I should forget about this and move on to some other newer puppy.
I just want a simple lightweight(like older versions) for web research and email.
Thks.