https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44135

James Cloos <cl...@jhcloos.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |cl...@jhcloos.com

--- Comment #60 from James Cloos <cl...@jhcloos.com> ---
I’m coming at this late, but some comments:

CUPS is not a renderrer.  I can, for some jobs, use a renderer.

One of the comments, noted that lo sent a pdf to cups, and that he was printing
to a postscript printer.  That implies that cups converted from pdf to ps.  For
that conversion, depending on the distribution, it will use one of ghostscript,
poppler or xpdf.

Because postscript does not support transparency, each of those will render any
pages which include transparency to a pixmap encased in postscript.

Current versions of ghostscript and poppler get it right.  (Note that poppler
is based on xpdf; its pdftops on xpdf’s pdftops, and its splash display engine
– used, eg, by occular – on xpdf.)  The bug probably was specific to xpdf.

Affected systems may be able to avoid that bug by configuring cups’ pdftops
filter to call ghostscript rather than pdftops(1).  (It’s a compile-time
options, IIRC.)

Printing to non-postscript printers probably calls cups’ gstoraster filter to
have ghostscript render the pdf directly to a raster file, which is then
converted to the printer’s raster format (pcl, esc/p, et cetera).

Someone on an affected system should test whether their local ghostscript can
render the pdf to an image file (png256 gives a good test).  If that works
well, then configuring cups to use gs rather than xpdf/poppler for conversions
to postscript should fix printing there.

Beyond that, mupdf is a better viewer than xpdf; it is at least as small, fast
and efficient.  And it gets this right.  There also is gv, which uses gs to do
the rendering.  Gv should be available on any distribution in use, as like
ghostscript it is older than linux.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
_______________________________________________
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs

Reply via email to