Linux/CUPS and 5Si drivers: generic postscript vs 5si-specific

[Keith Hanlan]

I am in the process of setting up my newly acquired 5Si on my (primarily) Linux network. All of the printer configuration tools include drivers which specifically support the 5Si family but they seem to assume that it is not a postscript printer. These drivers use Ghostscript to render the postscript to PCL.

The "generic" postscript drivers contain the following statement:

>This entry allows you to use any
>PostScript printer with Foomatic, at
>least with the basic options. Use it
>only for setting up your printer if
>your printer is not explicitly listed
>in the Foomatic database and if you
>don't have a native PPD file for it.
>See our PPD instructions and the
>"Postscript" driver entry for more
>information.

So the question is: what is preferable - using the printer's built-in postscript capability or letting ghostscript/foomatic do all the work?

And by extension: Should I just yank the postscript SIMM and replace it with another 16MB or RAM?

[Steven E. Protter · Accepted solution]

The answer depends on the application. If you can get away with whats built in the printer and generic driver, thats the way to go.

I you ever upgrade the OS, the specialized driver may or may not be migrated. Red Hat upgrades tend to step on stuff like that.

If you have ghostscript working really well, and you have need for it based on specific print situations, then go with it. We use ghostscript on our HP boxes to turn postscript into pcl for our easyspooler print queue.

SEP

[Keith Hanlan]

Thanks for the answer Steven. So, if I get hpijs working (another problem) should I replace the PostScript SIMM with another 16MB SIMM?

[Steven E. Protter]

Your best bet on the second question is the printing and imaging forum.

I don't know if thats something you can do with that model printer. I kinda hate printers. alot. If the printer manual says its okay, then I don't see the harm.

SEP