Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Brian]

On Wed 05 Oct 2016 at 15:10:42 -0500, David Wright wrote:

> On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 14:40:44 (+0100), Brian wrote:
> > On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 22:02:05 +0900, Mark Fletcher wrote:
> > 
> > > On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 01:31:03PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> > > > On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 20:54:32 +0900, Mark Fletcher wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 10:31:45PM +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > > > > > On Thursday 29 September 2016 16:03:38 Mark Fletcher wrote:
> > > > > > > which I find ironic
> > > > > > > considering what the U of CUPS stands for
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Why?  MacOSX is Unix based (via BSD) and CUPS is supposed to be 
> > > > > > common to all 
> > > > > > Unices (though I have only used it on Linux and MacOSX).
> > > > > > 
> > > > > Precisely, Lisi. Precisely.
> > > > 
> > > > The "U" in CUPS officially doesn't stand for anything. The same applies
> > > > to the "C", "P" and "S".
> > > > 
> > > According to whom, Brian? (Apart from you, obviously :) ). According to 
> > > the Internet (so it _must_ be true) it stands for Common Unix Printing 
> > > System. Are they, and the Gutenprint driver which prints that on its 
> > > test pages, just making sh*t up then? (To be fair I don't know which 
> > > component creates the test page, but I do know, because I am sitting 
> > > here with one about an inch away from my left hand, that when you ask 
> > > CUPS to print a test page, it prints that on the test page.)
> > 
> > I take it you are talking about the Debian PrinterTestPage (the logo is
> > at the left hand side). Nowhere on that page does it say "Common Unix
> > Printing System". Even if it did say that this is a Debian document, not an
> > official upstream CUPS document. It wouldn't count.
> > 
> > The Internet might want CUPS to mean "Common Unix Printing System"; it
> > could organise a day of protest demanding CUPS to mean "Common Unix
> > Printing System"; it could sell tee shirts saying "CUPS - the Common
> > Unix Printing System". That doesn't count either.
> > 
> > Find any significant occurance of "Common Unix Printing System" in the
> > official CUPS documentation or in its source code and there would be a
> > case to answer. There isn't, so there isn't. :)
> > 
> > The official name of the software is CUPS.
> 
> http://www.apple.com/server/docs/Print_Services_TB_v10.4.pdf
> "At the heart of Mac OS X Server print services is a comprehensive,
> standards-compliant open source printing architecture based on Common
> UNIX Printing System (CUPS)."

 brian@desktop:~$ pdfinfo Print_Services_TB_v10.4.pdf
 Title:  untitled
 Producer:   Acrobat Distiller 6.0 for Macintosh
 CreationDate:   Mon Apr  4 17:10:52 2005
 ModDate:Thu Apr  7 12:19:13 2005

Written in 2005. Wasn't that before Apple bought CUPS? ESP used CUPS
and Common UNIX Printing System interchangably at the time, didn't it?
It would be natural for a non-copyright holder (who had licensed the
software) to follow suit.

> https://developer.apple.com/library/content/documentation/Cocoa/Conceptual/Printing/osxp_aboutprinting/osxp_aboutprt.html
> "The Common UNIX Printing System (CUPS) layer provides the low-level
> services, print queue management, and driver interfaces needed to
> communicate with printing devices."

At the bottom of the page

 Copyright © 2002, 2012 Apple Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Most likely first written in 2002. Isn't that before Apple bought CUPS?
Now read the Revision History on the same page. Looks like someone
forgot something or didn't see it as important. That is often the nature
of web pages. I provided feedback but am not holding my breath.

> cups-2.2.1/locale/cups_ca.po (source)
> "#
>  # "$Id$"
>  #
>  #   Message catalog template for the Common UNIX Printing System (CUPS).
>  #
>  #   Copyright 2007-2015 by Apple Inc.
>  #   Copyright 2005-2007 by Easy Software Products.
>  #
>  #   These coded instructions, statements, and computer programs are the
>  #   property of Apple Inc. and are protected by Federal copyright
>  #   law.  Distribution and use rights are outlined in the file "LICENSE.txt"
>  #   which should have been included with this file.  If this file is
>  #   file is missing or damaged, see the license at "http://www.cups.org/;. "

Good catch. This is the only file in all the source code which has that
line in it. A reasonable person would ask themselves - is this
deliberate or is it an oversight? Does it have significance weighed up
against all the other evidence? Would a bug report produce a change or
not? Is there life after solving printing queries on -user?

> A couple of logos in cups-2.2.1/test/testfile.{pdf,ps} . The redition
> in the latter is protected by Apple's copyright.

The PS file does have the copyright Apple. It was originally in the ESP
distribution but the logo and the file became Apple's. I'm unsure what
the logo proves though; apart from the fact that the association of "C"
with "Common" is a link to the pre-Apple era.  That's ok; after 

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[David Wright]

On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 14:40:44 (+0100), Brian wrote:
> On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 22:02:05 +0900, Mark Fletcher wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 01:31:03PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> > > On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 20:54:32 +0900, Mark Fletcher wrote:
> > > 
> > > > On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 10:31:45PM +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > > > > On Thursday 29 September 2016 16:03:38 Mark Fletcher wrote:
> > > > > > which I find ironic
> > > > > > considering what the U of CUPS stands for
> > > > > 
> > > > > Why?  MacOSX is Unix based (via BSD) and CUPS is supposed to be 
> > > > > common to all 
> > > > > Unices (though I have only used it on Linux and MacOSX).
> > > > > 
> > > > Precisely, Lisi. Precisely.
> > > 
> > > The "U" in CUPS officially doesn't stand for anything. The same applies
> > > to the "C", "P" and "S".
> > > 
> > According to whom, Brian? (Apart from you, obviously :) ). According to 
> > the Internet (so it _must_ be true) it stands for Common Unix Printing 
> > System. Are they, and the Gutenprint driver which prints that on its 
> > test pages, just making sh*t up then? (To be fair I don't know which 
> > component creates the test page, but I do know, because I am sitting 
> > here with one about an inch away from my left hand, that when you ask 
> > CUPS to print a test page, it prints that on the test page.)
> 
> I take it you are talking about the Debian PrinterTestPage (the logo is
> at the left hand side). Nowhere on that page does it say "Common Unix
> Printing System". Even if it did say that this is a Debian document, not an
> official upstream CUPS document. It wouldn't count.
> 
> The Internet might want CUPS to mean "Common Unix Printing System"; it
> could organise a day of protest demanding CUPS to mean "Common Unix
> Printing System"; it could sell tee shirts saying "CUPS - the Common
> Unix Printing System". That doesn't count either.
> 
> Find any significant occurance of "Common Unix Printing System" in the
> official CUPS documentation or in its source code and there would be a
> case to answer. There isn't, so there isn't. :)
> 
> The official name of the software is CUPS.

http://www.apple.com/server/docs/Print_Services_TB_v10.4.pdf
"At the heart of Mac OS X Server print services is a comprehensive,
standards-compliant open source printing architecture based on Common
UNIX Printing System (CUPS)."

https://developer.apple.com/library/content/documentation/Cocoa/Conceptual/Printing/osxp_aboutprinting/osxp_aboutprt.html
"The Common UNIX Printing System (CUPS) layer provides the low-level
services, print queue management, and driver interfaces needed to
communicate with printing devices."

cups-2.2.1/locale/cups_ca.po (source)
"#
 # "$Id$"
 #
 #   Message catalog template for the Common UNIX Printing System (CUPS).
 #
 #   Copyright 2007-2015 by Apple Inc.
 #   Copyright 2005-2007 by Easy Software Products.
 #
 #   These coded instructions, statements, and computer programs are the
 #   property of Apple Inc. and are protected by Federal copyright
 #   law.  Distribution and use rights are outlined in the file "LICENSE.txt"
 #   which should have been included with this file.  If this file is
 #   file is missing or damaged, see the license at "http://www.cups.org/;. "

A couple of logos in cups-2.2.1/test/testfile.{pdf,ps} . The redition
in the latter is protected by Apple's copyright.

I suppose we now have to discuss the meaning of significant occurance [sic].

Cheers,
David.

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Lisi Reisz]

On Saturday 01 October 2016 20:45:52 Brian wrote:
> "Please pass the Houses of Parliament sauce" *is* a bit of a mouthful.
> Thank goodness for acronyms.

:-))

Lisi

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Brian]

On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 23:42:17 +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:

> On Friday 30 September 2016 19:25:52 Brian wrote:
> > Maintaining that CUPS is an official acronym for "Common Unix Printing
> > System" has, so far, not been substantiated.
> 
> Brian, do drop it.  No-one, but no-one, has claimed it is the *official*name. 
>  
> It can't be because of the trademark problem.  There is often a large gap 
> between something's name and its official name.

You mean we have spent all this time arguing about nothing when we could
have been doing something useful?

Dropped.

> No-one who has actually seen the bottle could doubt that HP stands for Houses 
> of Parliament.  I have only just checked that, but what else could it be with 
> that picture?  And it was NEVER called Houses of Parliament, but always HP.

"Please pass the Houses of Parliament sauce" *is* a bit of a mouthful.
Thank goodness for acronyms.

-- 
Brian.

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Brian]

On Sat 01 Oct 2016 at 06:03:08 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:

> Apple, unfortunately, seems bent on doing a microsoft to cups.

You are being provocative, aren't you? Quite unlike your usual self. :)

  * CUPS has not changed from being GPL.

  * Upstream CUPS is very responsive.

  * Upstream CUPS responds quickly and positively to bug reports.

  * Upstream CUPS takes notice of its Linux consumers.

  * Upstream CUPS co-operates with Linux printing system developers.

Three particulars on that last point.

  1. CUPS has incorporated systemd support into its source code.

  2. CUPS has supported interworking with Avahi.

  3. CUPS has catered for the Linux ecosystem.

All you (and I) have to do is sit back and enjoy it. Enjoy.

-- 
Brian.

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Brian]

On Sat 01 Oct 2016 at 23:05:58 +0900, Mark Fletcher wrote:

> On Sat, Oct 01, 2016 at 02:28:30PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> > 
> > Regarding the darker colors with the Gutenprint driver: does setting
> > Color Model to CMYK make any difference?
> > 
> Out of curiosity I tried that last night. Actually more accurately I 
> tried CMY, not CMYK. It made no difference. What is the K of CMYK? Cyan, 
> Magenta, Yellow, Kick-Ass??? Is there any reason I should expect CMYK to 
> do better than CMY or RGB?

K is black. It stands for "key". The three other colours are keyed
to it.

You shouldn't expect anything but CMYK sometimes produces an improvement.

-- 
Brian.

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Mark Fletcher]

On Sat, Oct 01, 2016 at 02:28:30PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> On Sat 01 Oct 2016 at 08:34:34 +0900, Mark Fletcher wrote:
> 
> > Libtiff4 is a little bit more interesting. "aptitude why" says that it 
> > is installed because the Canon printer driver needs it (by the way 
> > libjpeg8 did *not* say that the Canon printer driver needed it) and 
> > nothing else. So I'm less sure about what it was doing on my system 
> > before this. But, happily, it was there.
> 
> The Canon printer driver does not depend on libjpeg8. It is libtiff4
> which does.

Right, I get that (although I see why my reply might imply I didn't), 
but "aptitude why" is not acknowledging that dependency, which 
interested me... I guess it omits dependencies from things that are 
themselves automatically installed, perhaps?

> 
> Regarding the darker colors with the Gutenprint driver: does setting
> Color Model to CMYK make any difference?
> 

Out of curiosity I tried that last night. Actually more accurately I 
tried CMY, not CMYK. It made no difference. What is the K of CMYK? Cyan, 
Magenta, Yellow, Kick-Ass??? Is there any reason I should expect CMYK to 
do better than CMY or RGB?

Mark

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Brian]

On Sat 01 Oct 2016 at 08:34:34 +0900, Mark Fletcher wrote:

> Libtiff4 is a little bit more interesting. "aptitude why" says that it 
> is installed because the Canon printer driver needs it (by the way 
> libjpeg8 did *not* say that the Canon printer driver needed it) and 
> nothing else. So I'm less sure about what it was doing on my system 
> before this. But, happily, it was there.

The Canon printer driver does not depend on libjpeg8. It is libtiff4
which does.

Regarding the darker colors with the Gutenprint driver: does setting
Color Model to CMYK make any difference?

-- 
Brian.

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Gene Heskett]

On Saturday 01 October 2016 04:32:31 Brian wrote:

> On Sat 01 Oct 2016 at 00:39:35 -0500, David Wright wrote:
> > On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 22:48:38 (+0100), Brian wrote:
> > > On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 17:00:02 -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 03:49:23PM -0500, David Wright wrote:
> > > > > "CUPS is the standards-based, open source printing system
> > > > > developed by Apple Inc. for macOS® and other UNIX®-like
> > > > > operating systems."
> > > > >
> > > > > which is stretching the truth IMHO, given the normal meaning
> > > > > of "for", "and", and "other", written in that order. Calling
> > > > > it "Common UNIX Printing System" would blow that out of the
> > > > > water.
> > > >
> > > > Their use of "developed by" is rather jaw-dropping as well. 
> > > > Perhaps they mean it in the sense of "maintained by", but I
> > > > think most people
> > >
> > > No, they mean "developed by...".
> > >
> > > > would read it as "created by" which is blatantly untrue.
> > >
> > > Most people have an understanding of language (which you appear to
> > > lack) and would read it as "developed by...".
> >
> > I think that was rude and uncalled for.
>
> And crediting someone with indulging in doublespeak, being a lawyer
> and deserving pity isn't?
>
> > The clever thing about the web page is the careful omission of a
> > comma after system, so that the sentence gets read as
> >
> > C is the S   that is   developed by A
> >
> > rather than
> >
> > C is the S,   which was   developed by A.
> >
> > My observation is that most computer software websites credit the
> > original authors/creators/developers in a place easily found by
> > casual visitors. I haven't found any mention of Sweet outside the
> > blog, and only a mere two occurrences there.
>
> CUPS 2.2.0 was released on 13 Sep 2016. It was developed by Apple.
> CUPS 2.2.x will be developed by Apple and released soonish. CUPS
> 1.6.x, CUPS 1.7.x and CUPS 2.0.x were developed by Apple. Apple is the
> only entity developing CUPS. "C is the S that is developed by A" looks
> an accurate reflection of the state of affairs.

The last msg I have from the c...@cups.org mailing list is in may of 
2016, and is signed by:
Michael Sweet, Senior Printing System Engineer

Its possible I am not getting that list since moving my mail server usage 
to shentel.net, I had to call their support and have ALL my mailing list 
subscriptions whitelisted, and I may have failed to specify 
c...@cups.org as a good address to allow through. Humm, its acting like 
a new subscription request. So we'll see if it works.

Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page 

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Gene Heskett]

On Saturday 01 October 2016 01:39:35 David Wright wrote:

> On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 22:48:38 (+0100), Brian wrote:
> > On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 17:00:02 -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> > > On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 03:49:23PM -0500, David Wright wrote:
> > > > "CUPS is the standards-based, open source printing system
> > > > developed by Apple Inc. for macOS® and other UNIX®-like
> > > > operating systems."
> > > >
> > > > which is stretching the truth IMHO, given the normal meaning of
> > > > "for", "and", and "other", written in that order. Calling it
> > > > "Common UNIX Printing System" would blow that out of the water.
> > >
> > > Their use of "developed by" is rather jaw-dropping as well. 
> > > Perhaps they mean it in the sense of "maintained by", but I think
> > > most people
> >
> > No, they mean "developed by...".
> >
> > > would read it as "created by" which is blatantly untrue.
> >
> > Most people have an understanding of language (which you appear to
> > lack) and would read it as "developed by...".
>
> I think that was rude and uncalled for.
>
> The clever thing about the web page is the careful omission of a comma
> after system, so that the sentence gets read as
>
> C is the S   that is   developed by A
>
> rather than
>
> C is the S,   which was   developed by A.
>
> My observation is that most computer software websites credit the
> original authors/creators/developers in a place easily found by
> casual visitors. I haven't found any mention of Sweet outside the
> blog, and only a mere two occurrences there.
>
> Going back to your point about the logo, it's very odd that although
> "CUPS, the CUPS logo, and macOS are trademarks of Apple Inc.",
> http://www.apple.com/legal/intellectual-property/trademark/appletmlist
>.html makes no mention of CUPS or its logo, and I would appreciate
> anyone pointing out an example on the CUPS website. Its absence may be
> because Apple don't like putting it on the web as it has "UNIX"
> prominently displayed. The only legible occurrence I can see on my
> screen is the big one on the CUPS homepage. The logo that sits on
> every page appears to be deliberately fuzzy.
>
> As for the meaning of "develop", you seem to have been influenced by
> that fatuous sentence "Brexit means Brexit"! In the normal world,
> one of the meanings of "develop" is "create". For example,
>
> http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/develop
>
>  transitive verb
>
>  2 b : to create or produce especially by deliberate effort over time
> 
>
> Is this an unusual meaning in the context of computer software?
> Let's look at some great software creations and how they are reported:
>
> http://www.tex.ac.uk/FAQ-whatTeX.html
> "Knuth developed the first version of TeX in 1978 to deal with ..."
>
> https://www.fsf.org/news/richard-stallman-inducted-into-the-2013-inter
>net-hall-of-fame "Stallman developed a number of widely used software
> components of GNU ..."
>
> http://www.few.vu.nl/en/news-events/news-archive/2016/jan-mrt/30th-ann
>iversary-andrew-tanenbaums-minix.aspx "Emeritus professor Andrew
> Tanenbaum developed this operating system while ..."
>
> http://sunsite.uakom.sk/sunworldonline/swol-05-1998/swol-05-perl.html
> "Larry Wall developed Perl in 1987 to simplify administrative
> reporting ..."
>
> http://www.gocertify.com/articles/python-is-the-holy-grail-so-to-speak
>-of-programming-languages.html "Ultimately Rossum developed a language
> and interpreter that immediately ..."
>
> http://memim.com/lame.html
> "... Mike Cheng developed a patch for an example implementation of an
> MP3 encoder"
>
> Cheers,
> David.

Apple, unfortunately, seems bent on doing a microsoft to cups.

The most cogent post I can find on the cups blog states:
===
In February of 2007, Apple Inc. acquired ownership the CUPS source code 
and hired me (Michael R Sweet), the creator of CUPS.

CUPS will still be released under the existing GPL2/LGPL2 licensing 
terms, and I will continue to develop and support CUPS at Apple.

Answers to questions about the change of ownership can be found on the 
frequently asked questions page.
===
Mike has been stating that he is chair of that department in the mailing 
list messages, which have become rather far between.  The independent 
cups.org mailing list was shut down around a year later, effectively 
putting the apple beaurocracy between the user and Mike.

This is not a Good Thing IMO. For instance, debian wheezy is stuck on 
cups-1.53, well over 6 years old. It does however, work well. I can 
print to either of the printers sitting to the right of me from any of 
the other 4 machines currently up and running on my little home network, 
so I've no beef with printing here at the coyote.den other than my 
latest ink squirter is running at 5% of its advertised speed, and seems 
bent of making its starter ink cartridges last till the rapture.  Washed 
out prints seem to be the order of the day.  But it also can handle 
11x17" paper.

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Brian]

On Sat 01 Oct 2016 at 00:39:35 -0500, David Wright wrote:

> On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 22:48:38 (+0100), Brian wrote:
> > On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 17:00:02 -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> > 
> > > On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 03:49:23PM -0500, David Wright wrote:
> > > > "CUPS is the standards-based, open source printing system developed by
> > > > Apple Inc. for macOS® and other UNIX®-like operating systems."
> > > > 
> > > > which is stretching the truth IMHO, given the normal meaning of "for",
> > > > "and", and "other", written in that order. Calling it "Common UNIX
> > > > Printing System" would blow that out of the water.
> > > 
> > > Their use of "developed by" is rather jaw-dropping as well.  Perhaps
> > > they mean it in the sense of "maintained by", but I think most people
> > 
> > No, they mean "developed by...".
> > 
> > > would read it as "created by" which is blatantly untrue.
> > 
> > Most people have an understanding of language (which you appear to lack)
> > and would read it as "developed by...".
> 
> I think that was rude and uncalled for.

And crediting someone with indulging in doublespeak, being a lawyer and
deserving pity isn't?

> The clever thing about the web page is the careful omission of a comma
> after system, so that the sentence gets read as
> 
> C is the S   that is   developed by A
> 
> rather than
> 
> C is the S,   which was   developed by A.
> 
> My observation is that most computer software websites credit the
> original authors/creators/developers in a place easily found by
> casual visitors. I haven't found any mention of Sweet outside the
> blog, and only a mere two occurrences there.

CUPS 2.2.0 was released on 13 Sep 2016. It was developed by Apple. CUPS
2.2.x will be developed by Apple and released soonish. CUPS 1.6.x, CUPS
1.7.x and CUPS 2.0.x were developed by Apple. Apple is the only entity
developing CUPS. "C is the S that is developed by A" looks an accurate
reflection of the state of affairs.

-- 
Brian.

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[David Wright]

On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 22:48:38 (+0100), Brian wrote:
> On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 17:00:02 -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 03:49:23PM -0500, David Wright wrote:
> > > "CUPS is the standards-based, open source printing system developed by
> > > Apple Inc. for macOS® and other UNIX®-like operating systems."
> > > 
> > > which is stretching the truth IMHO, given the normal meaning of "for",
> > > "and", and "other", written in that order. Calling it "Common UNIX
> > > Printing System" would blow that out of the water.
> > 
> > Their use of "developed by" is rather jaw-dropping as well.  Perhaps
> > they mean it in the sense of "maintained by", but I think most people
> 
> No, they mean "developed by...".
> 
> > would read it as "created by" which is blatantly untrue.
> 
> Most people have an understanding of language (which you appear to lack)
> and would read it as "developed by...".

I think that was rude and uncalled for.

The clever thing about the web page is the careful omission of a comma
after system, so that the sentence gets read as

C is the S   that is   developed by A

rather than

C is the S,   which was   developed by A.

My observation is that most computer software websites credit the
original authors/creators/developers in a place easily found by
casual visitors. I haven't found any mention of Sweet outside the
blog, and only a mere two occurrences there.

Going back to your point about the logo, it's very odd that although
"CUPS, the CUPS logo, and macOS are trademarks of Apple Inc.",
http://www.apple.com/legal/intellectual-property/trademark/appletmlist.html
makes no mention of CUPS or its logo, and I would appreciate anyone
pointing out an example on the CUPS website. Its absence may be
because Apple don't like putting it on the web as it has "UNIX"
prominently displayed. The only legible occurrence I can see on my
screen is the big one on the CUPS homepage. The logo that sits on
every page appears to be deliberately fuzzy.

As for the meaning of "develop", you seem to have been influenced by
that fatuous sentence "Brexit means Brexit"! In the normal world,
one of the meanings of "develop" is "create". For example,

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/develop

 transitive verb

 2 b : to create or produce especially by deliberate effort over time


Is this an unusual meaning in the context of computer software?
Let's look at some great software creations and how they are reported:

http://www.tex.ac.uk/FAQ-whatTeX.html
"Knuth developed the first version of TeX in 1978 to deal with ..."

https://www.fsf.org/news/richard-stallman-inducted-into-the-2013-internet-hall-of-fame
"Stallman developed a number of widely used software components of GNU ..."

http://www.few.vu.nl/en/news-events/news-archive/2016/jan-mrt/30th-anniversary-andrew-tanenbaums-minix.aspx
"Emeritus professor Andrew Tanenbaum developed this operating system while ..."

http://sunsite.uakom.sk/sunworldonline/swol-05-1998/swol-05-perl.html
"Larry Wall developed Perl in 1987 to simplify administrative reporting ..."

http://www.gocertify.com/articles/python-is-the-holy-grail-so-to-speak-of-programming-languages.html
"Ultimately Rossum developed a language and interpreter that immediately ..."

http://memim.com/lame.html
"... Mike Cheng developed a patch for an example implementation of an MP3 
encoder"

Cheers,
David.

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Mark Fletcher]

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 06:10:43PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 22:31:24 +0900, Mark Fletcher wrote:
> 
> > This is what I did although in practice neither apt-get -f install nor 
> > Wheezy were needed.
> 
> Strange. cnijfilter-ix6500series_3.50-1_amd64.deb depends on libtiff4,
> which in turn depends on libjeg8. Nether of these is in Jessie. Could it
> be you already had them on your system?
> 

Yep, both are present here -- I can only assume that is because this 
system, as I've mentioned in past threads but did not in this one, was 
originally installed when etch was testing, and has been steadily 
upgraded since then as each new distribution became testing, until 
Jessie became stable at which point I didn't upgrade to stretch because 
by that time this machine was doing important enough things for me that 
I didn't want downtime for breakages.

Interestingly, both show as "Automatically Installed" according to aptitude. 
And yet if nothing depends on them in Jessie, I would have expected them to be 
removed... 

"aptitude why" answers the question for one of them. libjpeg8 is 
depended on by libgphoto2-2. I assume that's also an old package but it 
is installed on my machine and not automatically, I must have asked for 
it at some point. That library is about digital cameras so I assume I 
was wrestling with getting a digital camera to work with the PC at some 
point in the past. I don't remember that but it's entirely possible. 
Presumably nothing in Jessie actually conflicts with either libgphoto2-2 
or libjpeg8.

Libtiff4 is a little bit more interesting. "aptitude why" says that it 
is installed because the Canon printer driver needs it (by the way 
libjpeg8 did *not* say that the Canon printer driver needed it) and 
nothing else. So I'm less sure about what it was doing on my system 
before this. But, happily, it was there.

Mark

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Lisi Reisz]

On Friday 30 September 2016 19:25:52 Brian wrote:
> Maintaining that CUPS is an official acronym for "Common Unix Printing
> System" has, so far, not been substantiated.

Brian, do drop it.  No-one, but no-one, has claimed it is the *official*name.  
It can't be because of the trademark problem.  There is often a large gap 
between something's name and its official name.

No-one who has actually seen the bottle could doubt that HP stands for Houses 
of Parliament.  I have only just checked that, but what else could it be with 
that picture?  And it was NEVER called Houses of Parliament, but always HP.

Names don't die that easily.  Where I used to live, people looking for 
Riverside Cottage had considerable difficulty finding it.  Why?  Because it 
was called The Old Gas Cottage.  Merely changing the name didn't change what 
people called it.  The fire brigade would have had difficulty too, so I 
always thought that changing the name was stupid, however much the owners 
didn't like the name.

I was once asked to meet someone at the old Bull pub.  I couldn't find it.  
The next time I was given a description.  When I eventually found it the sign 
outside it said:  "La Tête du Boeuf French Restaurant".  EVERYONE (except 
presumably the new owners) still called it the old Bull's Head, or even just 
the old Bull.*

Names die hard.  An entity's legal name and the name it is known by can 
diverge wildly.

Lisi
* I see that a subsequent owner has had the sense to change the name back!
http://www.thebullsheadwarwickshire.co.uk/

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Brian]

On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 17:00:02 -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 03:49:23PM -0500, David Wright wrote:
> > "CUPS is the standards-based, open source printing system developed by
> > Apple Inc. for macOS® and other UNIX®-like operating systems."
> > 
> > which is stretching the truth IMHO, given the normal meaning of "for",
> > "and", and "other", written in that order. Calling it "Common UNIX
> > Printing System" would blow that out of the water.
> 
> Their use of "developed by" is rather jaw-dropping as well.  Perhaps
> they mean it in the sense of "maintained by", but I think most people

No, they mean "developed by...".

> would read it as "created by" which is blatantly untrue.

Most people have an understanding of language (which you appear to lack)
and would read it as "developed by...".

- 
Brian.

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Charlie]

On Fri, 30 Sep 2016 19:25:52 +0100 Brian sent:

> That is a very good point. If you were to ask xorg upstream why the X
> Window system is called "X Window" it is possible you would be told
> that it is the successor to the W Window system. This doesn't tell you
> exactly what it does but it does take a little of the mystery out of
> the name.

After contemplation, my reply is:

A little mystery is welcome.

Like in FVWM, not everything should be known, just named/labelled so we,
and others, know of what we speak or sign. The description is
everything.

Be well,
Charlie

-- 
Registered Linux User:- 329524
***

There is no treasure in the deep mountains; he who has no
desire for it finds it. -ZEN SAYING

***

Debian GNU/Linux - Magic indeed.

-

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Greg Wooledge]

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 03:49:23PM -0500, David Wright wrote:
> "CUPS is the standards-based, open source printing system developed by
> Apple Inc. for macOS® and other UNIX®-like operating systems."
> 
> which is stretching the truth IMHO, given the normal meaning of "for",
> "and", and "other", written in that order. Calling it "Common UNIX
> Printing System" would blow that out of the water.

Their use of "developed by" is rather jaw-dropping as well.  Perhaps
they mean it in the sense of "maintained by", but I think most people
would read it as "created by" which is blatantly untrue.

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[David Wright]

On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 14:40:44 (+0100), Brian wrote:

> The Internet might want CUPS to mean "Common Unix Printing System"; it
> could organise a day of protest demanding CUPS to mean "Common Unix
> Printing System"; it could sell tee shirts saying "CUPS - the Common
> Unix Printing System". That doesn't count either.
> 
> Find any significant occurance of "Common Unix Printing System" in the
> official CUPS documentation or in its source code and there would be a
> case to answer. There isn't, so there isn't. :)
> 
> The official name of the software is CUPS.

It would be very surprising to find any occurrence of the string
"Common UNIX Printing System" in CUPS even though that is the
derivation of the term CUPS and, I assume, was still current when
Apple bought it some time in 2007. After all, the home page says:

"CUPS

"CUPS is the standards-based, open source printing system developed by
Apple Inc. for macOS® and other UNIX®-like operating systems."

which is stretching the truth IMHO, given the normal meaning of "for",
"and", and "other", written in that order. Calling it "Common UNIX
Printing System" would blow that out of the water.

They have not air-brushed the original name out of history however.
The blog on their official web pages still documents the (apparently)
last version that carried that name: "Common UNIX Printing System 1.4b2"
15 Dec 2008, and all previous releases use the two names arbitrarily.

Cheers,
David.

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Brian]

On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 11:12:25 -0400, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:

> On Friday, September 30, 2016 10:46:16 AM Greg Wooledge wrote:
> > We are talking about right now.  The name CUPS is clearly an acronym
> > that stands for Common Unix Printing System (or "UNIX" if you prefer).
> > Everyone who uses CUPS knows this.  It's the dirty little secret that
> > Apple can no longer admit, because lawyers.
> 
> This is really a reply to Brian, but I'm quoting the above paragraph to 
> respond.
> 
> I'm talking about the past!
> 
> It is often useful to know the origin of a term--among other things, it is 
> sometimes more meaningful, as in this case.

That is a very good point. If you were to ask xorg upstream why the X
Window system is called "X Window" it is possible you would be told that
it is the successor to the W Window system. This doesn't tell you
exactly what it does but it does take a little of the mystery out of the
name.

> Common Unix Printing System was the (or close to the) original term.  The 
> fact 
> that it got changed for any reason doesn't keep my mind from thinking of it 
> as 
> the Common Unix Printing System, although I'm usually happy with the acronym 
> / 
> abbreviation CUPS.

I imagine there are many people who see the word "CUPS" as "Common Unix
Printing System"; it is natural because, as you say, it was known as
that for many years. No harm is done and it points to the software's
purpose and aids understanding. If CUPS still exists in thirty years the
meaning it had may very well have been forgotten. (Few people in the UK
remember what the HP in "HP sauce" originally stood for. It doesn't stop
them putting it on their fish and chips).

Maintaining that CUPS is an official acronym for "Common Unix Printing
System" has, so far, not been substantiated.

-- 
Brian.

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Gene Heskett]

On Friday 30 September 2016 11:37:13 Lisi Reisz wrote:

> On Friday 30 September 2016 16:12:59 Reco wrote:
> > Hi.
> >
> > On Fri, 30 Sep 2016 15:51:27 +0100
> >
> > Brian  wrote:
> > > On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 15:28:01 +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > > > On Friday 30 September 2016 14:55:07 Brian wrote:
> > > > > It does indeed say this. The "C" is not equated anywhere with
> > > > > "Common".
> > > >
> > > > No.  That is why I said "most of it", not "all of it".
> > >
> > > It isn't *any* of it.
> > >
> > > > If we are talking about British Institutions ...  Do you even
> > > > remember Consignia???  Did you even for one moment stop calling
> > > > it the Post Office? Lawyers are one thing.  What people are
> > > > prepared to say another.  I certainly never heard anyone say
> > > > "I'm popping down to Consignia to post a letter".
> > > >
> > > > In that case, the people won of course.  Consignia is dead, the
> > > > Post Office lives.
> > > >
> > > > CUPS was intended as Common Unix Printing System.  UNIX is a
> > > > trademark so Apple couldn't use it.  So, unlike for the name
> > > > Apple itself, where Mac lied to the court and seems to have got
> > > > away with it,  Apple obediently stopped using the name and
> > > > called it officially CUPS.  We, the people, continue to say
> > > > Common Unix Printing System.
> > >
> > > ESP called it the "Common Unix Printing System". Apple doesn't.
> > > Why should the wishes (and rights) of one company be respected but
> > > not those of another?
> > >
> > > Apple has probably trademarked "Common Unix Printing System". The
> > > People can continue to say what they want but it does not change
> > > the fact that the official name of the software is CUPS. That is
> > > what Debian uses.
> >
> > CUPS package description says "The Common UNIX Printing System (or
> > CUPS (tm))" for me. So Debian Project uses "Common UNIX Printing
> > System" as well.
>
> Thanks, Reco!  Hadn't thought of that. :
> "lisi@Eros:~$ aptitude show CUPS
> Package: cups
> State: installed
> Automatically installed: yes
> [snip]
> Maintainer: Debian Printing Team 
> [snip]
> *Description: Common UNIX Printing System(tm)* - PPD/driver
> support, web interface
> * The Common UNIX Printing System* (or CUPS(tm)) is a printing
> system etc."
>
> The stars are mine.  It does indeed seem to call it Common UNIX
> Printing System!!!  Twice!!!
>
> Lisi

When Mike Sweet started the CUPS project, there was not much printing 
support for linux.  There was lp, lpd to drive the lot but the details 
to drive the printers of the day were in the every man for himself 
category. My first linux install, Red Hat 5.0 in 1997 didn't have a clue 
how to drive the 24 pin OKI I was bringing over from an Amiga.

Mike, fresh out of school at the time, saw printing's poor support on 
linux as an opportunity to collect it all under one name.

IIRC CUPS was first available in 1999 or 2000.  And its gotten pretty 
good over the next 16 or 17 years.

I've known Mike longer than that, from back in the Delphi days in 1987 or 
so, he wrote several things for the CoCo (TRS-80 Color Computer's, a 
family of machines based on the motorola 6809)  that having gotten a 
passing grade from his comp sci prof, he published.  I did some fine 
tuning of a couple of them, gaining some speed in the process.  With his 
permission of course.

He has done well, selling CUPS to Apple several years ago while still 
keeping it all GPL. I wondered about that at the time, but its all come 
out quite well for all since.  Generally, if a makers printer is not in 
cups, its because the makers drivers are proprietary.  Those makers 
products rarely get any my fingerprints on them at the store when I need 
a fresh printer.

Some makers, Brother to name one, have linux drivers available for their 
stuff on their web pages, that work well with cups. I am useing Brothers 
drivers on this wheezy install to run one of their bigger MFC's, a 
printer/adf-scanner combo that can handle 11x17 inch paper. Not too 
handily, but it will do it.

Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page 

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Brian]

On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 22:31:24 +0900, Mark Fletcher wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 06:05:27PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> > On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 00:03:38 +0900, Mark Fletcher wrote:
> > 
> > > Anyway will finish trying to understand that shell script later -- it 
> > > wants me to run it as root, no way I am doing that until I have 
> > > satisfied myself I know roughly what it is going to do -- and then will 
> > > install the driver and compare the output.
> > 
> > Be a Debian man; dispense with that script and install the two provided
> > debs with 'dpkg -i'. I don't want to spoil the fun but will mention that
> > 'apt-get -f install' and Wheezy are your friends.
> > 
> 
> This is what I did although in practice neither apt-get -f install nor 
> Wheezy were needed.

Strange. cnijfilter-ix6500series_3.50-1_amd64.deb depends on libtiff4,
which in turn depends on libjeg8. Nether of these is in Jessie. Could it
be you already had them on your system?

> > It gets boring after the package install. A print queue is easily set up
> > and printing to file gives no trouble.
> 
> Indeed -- 2 dpkg -i invokations, and a setup of the printer in the CUPS 
> web admin tool, and I was done. I set up the "new" printer with a 
> slightly different name, so both can co-exist on the system. Looking at 
> the test page I could immediately see the colours were less dark with 
> the Canon driver. I then tried printing a couple of photos I had lying 
> around and they come out much better with the Canon driver. Windows 
> cannot print to the new CUPS printer, so clearly some of my fannying 
> around with AirPrint and/or samba did actually do something useful after 
> all. But Windows can still print, using the old printer, which has 
> always been good quality, and direct Linux printing can now get better 
> quality than before, so I am happy.
> 
> Thanks a lot Brian for your advice with this.

You're welcome.

-- 
Brian.
Who is beginning to wish Apple had renamed its printing software to SPUC.

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Brian]

On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 18:12:59 +0300, Reco wrote:

> On Fri, 30 Sep 2016 15:51:27 +0100
> Brian  wrote:
> 
> > ESP called it the "Common Unix Printing System". Apple doesn't. Why
> > should the wishes (and rights) of one company be respected but not those
> > of another?
> > 
> > Apple has probably trademarked "Common Unix Printing System". The People
> > can continue to say what they want but it does not change the fact that
> > the official name of the software is CUPS. That is what Debian uses.
> 
> CUPS package description says "The Common UNIX Printing System (or CUPS
> (tm))" for me. So Debian Project uses "Common UNIX Printing System" as
> well.

Thanks for pointing that out. The package description hasn't altered in
that respect since the early days when Debian packaged ESP CUPS. The
equating of "Common UNIX Printing System" and "CUPS" would have fitted
in well with how ESP described it. The description still uses both terms
(and acknowledges the trademarks) and still equates them even though the
present upstream does not 

Does this remnant from the pre-2007 days say something about Debian's
view or not? It might say something about Debian but it definitely says
nothing about the upstream developers' view. As I've said, "Common UNIX
Printing System" as an alternatve to CUPS is conspicuously absent from
all source code and official documentation.

-- 
Brian.

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Lisi Reisz]

On Friday 30 September 2016 16:12:59 Reco wrote:
>   Hi.
>
> On Fri, 30 Sep 2016 15:51:27 +0100
>
> Brian  wrote:
> > On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 15:28:01 +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > > On Friday 30 September 2016 14:55:07 Brian wrote:
> > > > It does indeed say this. The "C" is not equated anywhere with
> > > > "Common".
> > >
> > > No.  That is why I said "most of it", not "all of it".
> >
> > It isn't *any* of it.
> >
> > > If we are talking about British Institutions ...  Do you even remember
> > > Consignia???  Did you even for one moment stop calling it the Post
> > > Office? Lawyers are one thing.  What people are prepared to say
> > > another.  I certainly never heard anyone say "I'm popping down to
> > > Consignia to post a letter".
> > >
> > > In that case, the people won of course.  Consignia is dead, the Post
> > > Office lives.
> > >
> > > CUPS was intended as Common Unix Printing System.  UNIX is a trademark
> > > so Apple couldn't use it.  So, unlike for the name Apple itself, where
> > > Mac lied to the court and seems to have got away with it,  Apple
> > > obediently stopped using the name and called it officially CUPS.  We,
> > > the people, continue to say Common Unix Printing System.
> >
> > ESP called it the "Common Unix Printing System". Apple doesn't. Why
> > should the wishes (and rights) of one company be respected but not those
> > of another?
> >
> > Apple has probably trademarked "Common Unix Printing System". The People
> > can continue to say what they want but it does not change the fact that
> > the official name of the software is CUPS. That is what Debian uses.
>
> CUPS package description says "The Common UNIX Printing System (or CUPS
> (tm))" for me. So Debian Project uses "Common UNIX Printing System" as
> well.

Thanks, Reco!  Hadn't thought of that. :
"lisi@Eros:~$ aptitude show CUPS
Package: cups
State: installed
Automatically installed: yes
[snip]
Maintainer: Debian Printing Team 
[snip]
*Description: Common UNIX Printing System(tm)* - PPD/driver support, 
web interface
* The Common UNIX Printing System* (or CUPS(tm)) is a printing system 
etc."

The stars are mine.  It does indeed seem to call it Common UNIX Printing 
System!!!  Twice!!!

Lisi

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Brian]

On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 10:20:52 -0500, John Hasler wrote:

> Brian wrote:
> > The People can continue to say what they want but it does not change
> > the fact that the official name of the software is CUPS.
> 
> The salesmen can continue to say what they have to in order to comply
> with trademark law but the real name of the software is the Common Unix
> Printing System.  Those of us not selling printing systems have no
> reason to pay attention to the trademark issue.

Two things:

1. Debian doesn't sell anything.
2. Iceweasel.

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Brian]

On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 11:00:13 -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 03:51:27PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> > The People
> > can continue to say what they want but it does not change the fact that
> > the official name of the software is CUPS.
> 
> Yes, that is the new Official Name.

Good. Glad we sorted that out.

> Nobody(*) gives a flying leap what the Official Name is.  The question was
> what CUPS stands for.  It stands for Common Unix (or UNIX) Printing System.

Nobody reading the official documentation or source code would find
anything which says what CUPS stands for.
 
> (*) Except lawyers, and you.

I wouldn't want to disrespect the work of the KDE folk by calling their
software the "K Desktop Environment". That's all apart from it being
inaccurate.

-- 
Brian.

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[John Hasler]

rhkramer writes:
> Aside: If I'm in court, and the judge threatens to cite me for
> contempt if I say Common Unix Printing System, I'm not sure what I'll
> do ;-)

Won't happen (in the USA).  The judge will know the law.
-- 
John Hasler 
jhas...@newsguy.com
Elmwood, WI USA

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[John Hasler]

Brian wrote:
> The People can continue to say what they want but it does not change
> the fact that the official name of the software is CUPS.

The salesmen can continue to say what they have to in order to comply
with trademark law but the real name of the software is the Common Unix
Printing System.  Those of us not selling printing systems have no
reason to pay attention to the trademark issue.
-- 
John Hasler 
jhas...@newsguy.com
Elmwood, WI USA

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Reco]

Hi.

On Fri, 30 Sep 2016 15:51:27 +0100
Brian  wrote:

> On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 15:28:01 +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> 
> > On Friday 30 September 2016 14:55:07 Brian wrote:
> > > It does indeed say this. The "C" is not equated anywhere with "Common".
> > 
> > No.  That is why I said "most of it", not "all of it".
> 
> It isn't *any* of it.
> 
> > If we are talking about British Institutions ...  Do you even remember 
> > Consignia???  Did you even for one moment stop calling it the Post Office?  
> > Lawyers are one thing.  What people are prepared to say another.  I 
> > certainly 
> > never heard anyone say "I'm popping down to Consignia to post a letter".
> > 
> > In that case, the people won of course.  Consignia is dead, the Post Office 
> > lives.
> > 
> > CUPS was intended as Common Unix Printing System.  UNIX is a trademark so 
> > Apple couldn't use it.  So, unlike for the name Apple itself, where Mac 
> > lied 
> > to the court and seems to have got away with it,  Apple obediently stopped 
> > using the name and called it officially CUPS.  We, the people, continue to 
> > say Common Unix Printing System.
> 
> ESP called it the "Common Unix Printing System". Apple doesn't. Why
> should the wishes (and rights) of one company be respected but not those
> of another?
> 
> Apple has probably trademarked "Common Unix Printing System". The People
> can continue to say what they want but it does not change the fact that
> the official name of the software is CUPS. That is what Debian uses.

CUPS package description says "The Common UNIX Printing System (or CUPS
(tm))" for me. So Debian Project uses "Common UNIX Printing System" as
well.

Reco

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[rhkramer]

On Friday, September 30, 2016 10:46:16 AM Greg Wooledge wrote:
> We are talking about right now.  The name CUPS is clearly an acronym
> that stands for Common Unix Printing System (or "UNIX" if you prefer).
> Everyone who uses CUPS knows this.  It's the dirty little secret that
> Apple can no longer admit, because lawyers.

This is really a reply to Brian, but I'm quoting the above paragraph to 
respond.

I'm talking about the past!

It is often useful to know the origin of a term--among other things, it is 
sometimes more meaningful, as in this case.  

Common Unix Printing System was the (or close to the) original term.  The fact 
that it got changed for any reason doesn't keep my mind from thinking of it as 
the Common Unix Printing System, although I'm usually happy with the acronym / 
abbreviation CUPS.

(Aside: If I'm in court, and the judge threatens to cite me for contempt if I 
say Common Unix Printing System, I'm not sure what I'll do ;-)

I'd like to think of one or more additional examples, but none immediately 
come--oh, how about radar, sonar, lidar, laser, MCC (for me, usually Motor 
Control Center, for CEGELEC, Mill Control Computer, and for others, other 
meanings depending on the context), ...in fact, it helps me to know (and think 
in terms of) the original words comprising any acronym or "natural word" 
derived from an acronym. 

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Brian]

On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 10:46:16 -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 03:37:55PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> > On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 16:20:03 +0200, Frank wrote:
> > > It is. Check (most of) the entries in the blog at
> > > https://www.cups.org/blog.html from 10 Jul 2000 to 15 Dec 2008.
> > 
> > I thought it was obvious we were talking about now, not the past. ESP
> > was sold to Apple in 2007. The change in naming would not have been
> > carried out immediately. There appears to have been a year's delay, for
> > whatever reason.
> 
> We are talking about right now.  The name CUPS is clearly an acronym
> that stands for Common Unix Printing System (or "UNIX" if you prefer).
> Everyone who uses CUPS knows this.  It's the dirty little secret that
> Apple can no longer admit, because lawyers.

This argument makes Xfce and KDE to be clearly acronyms in spite of the
expressed wishes of the Xfce and KDE Foundations

> You are doublethinking.  In your world, CUPS isn't an acronym, and you
> have always been at war with Eastasia.

CUPS isn't an acronym in any world which has respect for legality when
it matters.

-- 
Brian.

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Greg Wooledge]

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 03:51:27PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> The People
> can continue to say what they want but it does not change the fact that
> the official name of the software is CUPS.

Yes, that is the new Official Name.

Nobody(*) gives a flying leap what the Official Name is.  The question was
what CUPS stands for.  It stands for Common Unix (or UNIX) Printing System.

(*) Except lawyers, and you.

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Brian]

On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 15:28:01 +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:

> On Friday 30 September 2016 14:55:07 Brian wrote:
> > It does indeed say this. The "C" is not equated anywhere with "Common".
> 
> No.  That is why I said "most of it", not "all of it".

It isn't *any* of it.

> If we are talking about British Institutions ...  Do you even remember 
> Consignia???  Did you even for one moment stop calling it the Post Office?  
> Lawyers are one thing.  What people are prepared to say another.  I certainly 
> never heard anyone say "I'm popping down to Consignia to post a letter".
> 
> In that case, the people won of course.  Consignia is dead, the Post Office 
> lives.
> 
> CUPS was intended as Common Unix Printing System.  UNIX is a trademark so 
> Apple couldn't use it.  So, unlike for the name Apple itself, where Mac lied 
> to the court and seems to have got away with it,  Apple obediently stopped 
> using the name and called it officially CUPS.  We, the people, continue to 
> say Common Unix Printing System.

ESP called it the "Common Unix Printing System". Apple doesn't. Why
should the wishes (and rights) of one company be respected but not those
of another?

Apple has probably trademarked "Common Unix Printing System". The People
can continue to say what they want but it does not change the fact that
the official name of the software is CUPS. That is what Debian uses.

-- 
Brian.

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Greg Wooledge]

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 03:37:55PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 16:20:03 +0200, Frank wrote:
> > It is. Check (most of) the entries in the blog at
> > https://www.cups.org/blog.html from 10 Jul 2000 to 15 Dec 2008.
> 
> I thought it was obvious we were talking about now, not the past. ESP
> was sold to Apple in 2007. The change in naming would not have been
> carried out immediately. There appears to have been a year's delay, for
> whatever reason.

We are talking about right now.  The name CUPS is clearly an acronym
that stands for Common Unix Printing System (or "UNIX" if you prefer).
Everyone who uses CUPS knows this.  It's the dirty little secret that
Apple can no longer admit, because lawyers.

You are doublethinking.  In your world, CUPS isn't an acronym, and you
have always been at war with Eastasia.

Or, you are a lawyer.  In which case, you have my pity.

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Brian]

On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 16:20:03 +0200, Frank wrote:

> Op 30-09-16 om 15:55 schreef Brian:
> >It does indeed say this. The "C" is not equated anywhere with "Common".
> 
> It is. Check (most of) the entries in the blog at
> https://www.cups.org/blog.html from 10 Jul 2000 to 15 Dec 2008.

I thought it was obvious we were talking about now, not the past. ESP
was sold to Apple in 2007. The change in naming would not have been
carried out immediately. There appears to have been a year's delay, for
whatever reason.

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Lisi Reisz]

On Friday 30 September 2016 14:55:07 Brian wrote:
> It does indeed say this. The "C" is not equated anywhere with "Common".

No.  That is why I said "most of it", not "all of it".

If we are talking about British Institutions ...  Do you even remember 
Consignia???  Did you even for one moment stop calling it the Post Office?  
Lawyers are one thing.  What people are prepared to say another.  I certainly 
never heard anyone say "I'm popping down to Consignia to post a letter".

In that case, the people won of course.  Consignia is dead, the Post Office 
lives.

CUPS was intended as Common Unix Printing System.  UNIX is a trademark so 
Apple couldn't use it.  So, unlike for the name Apple itself, where Mac lied 
to the court and seems to have got away with it,  Apple obediently stopped 
using the name and called it officially CUPS.  We, the people, continue to 
say Common Unix Printing System.

Lisi

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Frank]

Op 30-09-16 om 15:55 schreef Brian:

It does indeed say this. The "C" is not equated anywhere with "Common".


It is. Check (most of) the entries in the blog at 
https://www.cups.org/blog.html from 10 Jul 2000 to 15 Dec 2008.


Regards,
Frank

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Brian]

On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 09:28:15 -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 02:20:43PM +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > > On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 01:31:03PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> > > > The "U" in CUPS officially doesn't stand for anything. The same applies
> > > > to the "C", "P" and "S".
> 
> > It also says most of it, definitely that U stands for Unix, on the home 
> > page 
> > of the CUPS web interface.:
> > "CUPS 1.7.5
> > CUPS is the standards-based, open source printing system developed by Apple 
> > Inc. for OS® X and other UNIX®-like operating systems."  followed by a 
> > large 
> > capital C containing the words "Unix Printing System".
> 
> Wikipedia  has conflicting
> information.  At the top of the page, it claims CUPS stands for "Common
> Unix Printing System", but without a reference.  At the bottom of the
> page, it claims:
> 
>   CUPS was initially called "The Common UNIX Printing System". This
>   name was shortened to just "CUPS" beginning with CUPS 1.4 due to legal
>   concerns with the UNIX trademark.[citation needed]
> 
> This seems like one of those situations where Everyone Knows what the
> truth is ("Common Unix Printing System"), but corporations and lawyers
> require the Official Story to be a thin facade of lies.  But that's just
> my take.

Everybody knows what Xfce and KDE stand for. Which corporations and
lawyers require a thin facade of lies here?

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Brian]

On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 14:20:43 +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:

> On Friday 30 September 2016 14:02:05 Mark Fletcher wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 01:31:03PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> > > On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 20:54:32 +0900, Mark Fletcher wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 10:31:45PM +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > > > > On Thursday 29 September 2016 16:03:38 Mark Fletcher wrote:
> > > > > > which I find ironic
> > > > > > considering what the U of CUPS stands for
> > > > >
> > > > > Why?  MacOSX is Unix based (via BSD) and CUPS is supposed to be
> > > > > common to all Unices (though I have only used it on Linux and
> > > > > MacOSX).
> > > >
> > > > Precisely, Lisi. Precisely.
> > >
> > > The "U" in CUPS officially doesn't stand for anything. The same applies
> > > to the "C", "P" and "S".
> >
> > According to whom, Brian? (Apart from you, obviously :) ). According to
> > the Internet (so it _must_ be true) it stands for Common Unix Printing
> > System. Are they, and the Gutenprint driver which prints that on its
> > test pages, just making sh*t up then? (To be fair I don't know which
> > component creates the test page, but I do know, because I am sitting
> > here with one about an inch away from my left hand, that when you ask
> > CUPS to print a test page, it prints that on the test page.)
> >
> > Mark (who is trying to figure out how Wheezy is going to figure in this
> > driver install...)
> 
> It also says most of it, definitely that U stands for Unix, on the home page 
> of the CUPS web interface.:

It definitely does not say that. Nowhere is "U" equated with "Unix"

> "CUPS 1.7.5
> CUPS is the standards-based, open source printing system developed by Apple 
> Inc. for OS® X and other UNIX®-like operating systems."  followed by a large 
> capital C containing the words "Unix Printing System".

It does indeed say this. The "C" is not equated anywhere with "Common".

A bottle of sauce made by HP (a division of Heinz) can have a picture of
what looks the London Houses of Parliament on its label. Does that tell
you what HP officially stands for? That is, if it stands for anything at
all.

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Brian]

On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 22:02:05 +0900, Mark Fletcher wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 01:31:03PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> > On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 20:54:32 +0900, Mark Fletcher wrote:
> > 
> > > On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 10:31:45PM +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > > > On Thursday 29 September 2016 16:03:38 Mark Fletcher wrote:
> > > > > which I find ironic
> > > > > considering what the U of CUPS stands for
> > > > 
> > > > Why?  MacOSX is Unix based (via BSD) and CUPS is supposed to be common 
> > > > to all 
> > > > Unices (though I have only used it on Linux and MacOSX).
> > > > 
> > > Precisely, Lisi. Precisely.
> > 
> > The "U" in CUPS officially doesn't stand for anything. The same applies
> > to the "C", "P" and "S".
> > 
> According to whom, Brian? (Apart from you, obviously :) ). According to 
> the Internet (so it _must_ be true) it stands for Common Unix Printing 
> System. Are they, and the Gutenprint driver which prints that on its 
> test pages, just making sh*t up then? (To be fair I don't know which 
> component creates the test page, but I do know, because I am sitting 
> here with one about an inch away from my left hand, that when you ask 
> CUPS to print a test page, it prints that on the test page.)

I take it you are talking about the Debian PrinterTestPage (the logo is
at the left hand side). Nowhere on that page does it say "Common Unix
Printing System". Even if it did say that this is a Debian document, not an
official upstream CUPS document. It wouldn't count.

The Internet might want CUPS to mean "Common Unix Printing System"; it
could organise a day of protest demanding CUPS to mean "Common Unix
Printing System"; it could sell tee shirts saying "CUPS - the Common
Unix Printing System". That doesn't count either.

Find any significant occurance of "Common Unix Printing System" in the
official CUPS documentation or in its source code and there would be a
case to answer. There isn't, so there isn't. :)

The official name of the software is CUPS.

-- 
Brian.

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Mark Fletcher]

On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 06:05:27PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 00:03:38 +0900, Mark Fletcher wrote:
> 
> > Anyway will finish trying to understand that shell script later -- it 
> > wants me to run it as root, no way I am doing that until I have 
> > satisfied myself I know roughly what it is going to do -- and then will 
> > install the driver and compare the output.
> 
> Be a Debian man; dispense with that script and install the two provided
> debs with 'dpkg -i'. I don't want to spoil the fun but will mention that
> 'apt-get -f install' and Wheezy are your friends.
> 

This is what I did although in practice neither apt-get -f install nor 
Wheezy were needed.

> It gets boring after the package install. A print queue is easily set up
> and printing to file gives no trouble.
> 

Indeed -- 2 dpkg -i invokations, and a setup of the printer in the CUPS 
web admin tool, and I was done. I set up the "new" printer with a 
slightly different name, so both can co-exist on the system. Looking at 
the test page I could immediately see the colours were less dark with 
the Canon driver. I then tried printing a couple of photos I had lying 
around and they come out much better with the Canon driver. Windows 
cannot print to the new CUPS printer, so clearly some of my fannying 
around with AirPrint and/or samba did actually do something useful after 
all. But Windows can still print, using the old printer, which has 
always been good quality, and direct Linux printing can now get better 
quality than before, so I am happy.

Thanks a lot Brian for your advice with this.

Mark

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Greg Wooledge]

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 02:20:43PM +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 01:31:03PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> > > The "U" in CUPS officially doesn't stand for anything. The same applies
> > > to the "C", "P" and "S".

> It also says most of it, definitely that U stands for Unix, on the home page 
> of the CUPS web interface.:
> "CUPS 1.7.5
> CUPS is the standards-based, open source printing system developed by Apple 
> Inc. for OS® X and other UNIX®-like operating systems."  followed by a large 
> capital C containing the words "Unix Printing System".

Wikipedia  has conflicting
information.  At the top of the page, it claims CUPS stands for "Common
Unix Printing System", but without a reference.  At the bottom of the
page, it claims:

  CUPS was initially called "The Common UNIX Printing System". This
  name was shortened to just "CUPS" beginning with CUPS 1.4 due to legal
  concerns with the UNIX trademark.[citation needed]

This seems like one of those situations where Everyone Knows what the
truth is ("Common Unix Printing System"), but corporations and lawyers
require the Official Story to be a thin facade of lies.  But that's just
my take.

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Lisi Reisz]

On Friday 30 September 2016 14:02:05 Mark Fletcher wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 01:31:03PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> > On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 20:54:32 +0900, Mark Fletcher wrote:
> > > On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 10:31:45PM +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > > > On Thursday 29 September 2016 16:03:38 Mark Fletcher wrote:
> > > > > which I find ironic
> > > > > considering what the U of CUPS stands for
> > > >
> > > > Why?  MacOSX is Unix based (via BSD) and CUPS is supposed to be
> > > > common to all Unices (though I have only used it on Linux and
> > > > MacOSX).
> > >
> > > Precisely, Lisi. Precisely.
> >
> > The "U" in CUPS officially doesn't stand for anything. The same applies
> > to the "C", "P" and "S".
>
> According to whom, Brian? (Apart from you, obviously :) ). According to
> the Internet (so it _must_ be true) it stands for Common Unix Printing
> System. Are they, and the Gutenprint driver which prints that on its
> test pages, just making sh*t up then? (To be fair I don't know which
> component creates the test page, but I do know, because I am sitting
> here with one about an inch away from my left hand, that when you ask
> CUPS to print a test page, it prints that on the test page.)
>
> Mark (who is trying to figure out how Wheezy is going to figure in this
> driver install...)

It also says most of it, definitely that U stands for Unix, on the home page 
of the CUPS web interface.:
"CUPS 1.7.5
CUPS is the standards-based, open source printing system developed by Apple 
Inc. for OS® X and other UNIX®-like operating systems."  followed by a large 
capital C containing the words "Unix Printing System".

Lisi

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Mark Fletcher]

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 01:31:03PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 20:54:32 +0900, Mark Fletcher wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 10:31:45PM +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > > On Thursday 29 September 2016 16:03:38 Mark Fletcher wrote:
> > > > which I find ironic
> > > > considering what the U of CUPS stands for
> > > 
> > > Why?  MacOSX is Unix based (via BSD) and CUPS is supposed to be common to 
> > > all 
> > > Unices (though I have only used it on Linux and MacOSX).
> > > 
> > Precisely, Lisi. Precisely.
> 
> The "U" in CUPS officially doesn't stand for anything. The same applies
> to the "C", "P" and "S".
> 
According to whom, Brian? (Apart from you, obviously :) ). According to 
the Internet (so it _must_ be true) it stands for Common Unix Printing 
System. Are they, and the Gutenprint driver which prints that on its 
test pages, just making sh*t up then? (To be fair I don't know which 
component creates the test page, but I do know, because I am sitting 
here with one about an inch away from my left hand, that when you ask 
CUPS to print a test page, it prints that on the test page.)

Mark (who is trying to figure out how Wheezy is going to figure in this 
driver install...)

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Brian]

On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 20:54:32 +0900, Mark Fletcher wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 10:31:45PM +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > On Thursday 29 September 2016 16:03:38 Mark Fletcher wrote:
> > > which I find ironic
> > > considering what the U of CUPS stands for
> > 
> > Why?  MacOSX is Unix based (via BSD) and CUPS is supposed to be common to 
> > all 
> > Unices (though I have only used it on Linux and MacOSX).
> > 
> Precisely, Lisi. Precisely.

The "U" in CUPS officially doesn't stand for anything. The same applies
to the "C", "P" and "S".

-- 
Brian.

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Mark Fletcher]

On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 10:31:45PM +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> On Thursday 29 September 2016 16:03:38 Mark Fletcher wrote:
> > which I find ironic
> > considering what the U of CUPS stands for
> 
> Why?  MacOSX is Unix based (via BSD) and CUPS is supposed to be common to all 
> Unices (though I have only used it on Linux and MacOSX).
> 
Precisely, Lisi. Precisely.

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Lisi Reisz]

On Thursday 29 September 2016 16:03:38 Mark Fletcher wrote:
> which I find ironic
> considering what the U of CUPS stands for

Why?  MacOSX is Unix based (via BSD) and CUPS is supposed to be common to all 
Unices (though I have only used it on Linux and MacOSX).

Lisi

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Brian]

On Fri 30 Sep 2016 at 00:03:38 +0900, Mark Fletcher wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 11:25:19AM +0100, Brian wrote:
> > You should now be able to compare the outputs of the Gutenprint and
> > Canon drivers. Color management support is done by cups-filters
> > (completed in Aug 2014) so it will be common to both drivers.
> 
> Just to say I have downloaded the Canon driver, and also did an 
> independent search for the specific model, which indeed only seems to be 
> specifically mentioned on Japanese sites. But searches there take me to 
> the same driver, so that is good. I'll install this and try test 
> printing as soon as I have enough time in front of this machine, may be 
> the weekend the way this week is going.
> 
> Didn't want you to think I had wandered off. Appreciate your help.

Appreciated.

> One thing I noticed -- the site mentions CUPS drivers, but only in 
> connection with the Mac version of the driver, which I find ironic 
> considering what the U of CUPS stands for. On the other hand the Linux 
> driver doesn't mention CUPS. However, on downloading the Linux driver 
> and pawing through the files that come with it, the install shell script 
> is looking for a working CUPS installation which is somewhat reassuring.

The Mac only has CUPS printing system whereas Linux additionally has
lprng. That might not be the significance, of course. Note that if you
asked upstream what CUPS stood for they would probably say "nothing".

> Anyway will finish trying to understand that shell script later -- it 
> wants me to run it as root, no way I am doing that until I have 
> satisfied myself I know roughly what it is going to do -- and then will 
> install the driver and compare the output.

Be a Debian man; dispense with that script and install the two provided
debs with 'dpkg -i'. I don't want to spoil the fun but will mention that
'apt-get -f install' and Wheezy are your friends.

> More to follow...

It gets boring after the package install. A print queue is easily set up
and printing to file gives no trouble.

-- 
Brian.

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Mark Fletcher]

On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 11:25:19AM +0100, Brian wrote:
> On Wed 28 Sep 2016 at 07:43:54 +0900, Mark Fletcher wrote:
> 
> > Sorry Brian, I think some confusion there due to my phrasing in the 
> > original post. There is, to my knowledge, no Canon-supplied Linux CUPS 
> > driver for this printer. When I said some variation of "Canon iX6500 
> > series driver" in my original post, I was referring to the Gutenprint 
> > driver as that is what the Gutenprint driver is called.
> 
> https://www.canondrivers.org/canon-pixma-ix6500-series-driver-download/
>  

> 
> You should now be able to compare the outputs of the Gutenprint and
> Canon drivers. Color management support is done by cups-filters
> (completed in Aug 2014) so it will be common to both drivers.
> 

Just to say I have downloaded the Canon driver, and also did an 
independent search for the specific model, which indeed only seems to be 
specifically mentioned on Japanese sites. But searches there take me to 
the same driver, so that is good. I'll install this and try test 
printing as soon as I have enough time in front of this machine, may be 
the weekend the way this week is going.

Didn't want you to think I had wandered off. Appreciate your help.

One thing I noticed -- the site mentions CUPS drivers, but only in 
connection with the Mac version of the driver, which I find ironic 
considering what the U of CUPS stands for. On the other hand the Linux 
driver doesn't mention CUPS. However, on downloading the Linux driver 
and pawing through the files that come with it, the install shell script 
is looking for a working CUPS installation which is somewhat reassuring.

Anyway will finish trying to understand that shell script later -- it 
wants me to run it as root, no way I am doing that until I have 
satisfied myself I know roughly what it is going to do -- and then will 
install the driver and compare the output.

More to follow...

Mark

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Brian]

On Wed 28 Sep 2016 at 07:43:54 +0900, Mark Fletcher wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 10:53:11PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> > 
> > It wasn't cups-calibrate I was really advocating but the trying out of
> > printing a file using the Canon and Gutenprint drivers. Do both give the
> > same outcome?
> 
> Sorry Brian, I think some confusion there due to my phrasing in the 
> original post. There is, to my knowledge, no Canon-supplied Linux CUPS 
> driver for this printer. When I said some variation of "Canon iX6500 
> series driver" in my original post, I was referring to the Gutenprint 
> driver as that is what the Gutenprint driver is called.

https://www.canondrivers.org/canon-pixma-ix6500-series-driver-download/
 
> Now I will be honest, I haven't googled this recently, and don't have 
> time to even now as I am actually supposed to be in the shower and then 
> on my way to work, but I will check later... but at the time I first set 
> this printer up I could not find anything from Canon for Linux for this 
> printer. Language may have been getting in the way at the time, as this 
> particular model number is/was only ever sold in Japan to my knowledge.
> 
> In the very early days Gutenprint didn't have a driver either and I was 
> using a driver with a very approximately similar name which very 
> approximately worked... but in the fullness of time the Gutenprint 
> driver I am using appeared (or I finally saw what was in front of my 
> face, that is also possible) and I am using it now. The darkness of 
> native Linux printing, and the contrast if you will pardon the pun 
> between that and printing from Windows, didn't strike me until some time 
> later when the driver situation had been stable for some time.

A driver came in Gutenprint 5.2.10 (May 2014)

> So to the best of my knowledge I'm using the right driver, all functions 
> certainly work, and the only issue is how dark the images come out, 
> compared to the high quality results I get when I print from Windows.

The driver is marked EXPERIMENTAL, which could be because it hasn't been
extensively tested.

> Incidentally, the printer _does_ come with a driver (and a ton of 
> bloatware) for Windows. On one Windows printer I installed the driver 
> and the bloatware, on the other VM I installed the absolute minimum to 
> get the network printer to install. (and when I say network printer, I 
> mean from Windows' perspective -- this printer is not a network printer 
> as far as it is concerned, there is no ethernet port on it, the only way 
> in is USB). So the bloatware isn't the reason the printer is looking 
> better under Windows, since both VMs can print with better results (and 
> the same as each other).
> 
> So I am being drawn to the conclusion that your comments about the 
> non-existent Canon driver (it being rubbish at colour management) can be 
> applied instead to the Gutenprint driver, hence the way I perked up when 
> you mentioned cups-calibrate. Which I will try the second I get longer 
> than 5 mins in front of my PC.

You should now be able to compare the outputs of the Gutenprint and
Canon drivers. Color management support is done by cups-filters
(completed in Aug 2014) so it will be common to both drivers.

-- 
Brian.

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Mark Fletcher]

On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 10:53:11PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> 
> It wasn't cups-calibrate I was really advocating but the trying out of
> printing a file using the Canon and Gutenprint drivers. Do both give the
> same outcome?

Sorry Brian, I think some confusion there due to my phrasing in the 
original post. There is, to my knowledge, no Canon-supplied Linux CUPS 
driver for this printer. When I said some variation of "Canon iX6500 
series driver" in my original post, I was referring to the Gutenprint 
driver as that is what the Gutenprint driver is called.

Now I will be honest, I haven't googled this recently, and don't have 
time to even now as I am actually supposed to be in the shower and then 
on my way to work, but I will check later... but at the time I first set 
this printer up I could not find anything from Canon for Linux for this 
printer. Language may have been getting in the way at the time, as this 
particular model number is/was only ever sold in Japan to my knowledge.

In the very early days Gutenprint didn't have a driver either and I was 
using a driver with a very approximately similar name which very 
approximately worked... but in the fullness of time the Gutenprint 
driver I am using appeared (or I finally saw what was in front of my 
face, that is also possible) and I am using it now. The darkness of 
native Linux printing, and the contrast if you will pardon the pun 
between that and printing from Windows, didn't strike me until some time 
later when the driver situation had been stable for some time.

So to the best of my knowledge I'm using the right driver, all functions 
certainly work, and the only issue is how dark the images come out, 
compared to the high quality results I get when I print from Windows.

Incidentally, the printer _does_ come with a driver (and a ton of 
bloatware) for Windows. On one Windows printer I installed the driver 
and the bloatware, on the other VM I installed the absolute minimum to 
get the network printer to install. (and when I say network printer, I 
mean from Windows' perspective -- this printer is not a network printer 
as far as it is concerned, there is no ethernet port on it, the only way 
in is USB). So the bloatware isn't the reason the printer is looking 
better under Windows, since both VMs can print with better results (and 
the same as each other).

So I am being drawn to the conclusion that your comments about the 
non-existent Canon driver (it being rubbish at colour management) can be 
applied instead to the Gutenprint driver, hence the way I perked up when 
you mentioned cups-calibrate. Which I will try the second I get longer 
than 5 mins in front of my PC.

Thanks

Mark

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Brian]

On Tue 27 Sep 2016 at 08:09:07 +0900, Mark Fletcher wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 05:17:40PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> > 
> > The colour abnormality could be simply be because the Canon driver is
> > rubbish at colour management or it needs adjusting. There is a driver in
> > printer-driver-gutenprint which is for your printer; I'd suggest testing
> > that with the printer. It comes with the cups-calibrate program.
> > 
> 
> Thanks. I am using the Gutenprint driver. I see cups-calibrate in my 
> future -- didn't know that existed. I'd been sort of hidebound by the 
> assumption that everything from Windows must have been going through the 
> same CUPS path as everything from Linux -- but the evidence sort of 
> disproves that doesn't it. Thanks, I'll look into cups-calibrate.

It wasn't cups-calibrate I was really advocating but the trying out of
printing a file using the Canon and Gutenprint drivers. Do both give the
same outcome?

-- 
Brian.

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Mark Fletcher]

On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 07:14:26PM +0200, deloptes wrote:
> Brian wrote:
> 
> > On Mon 26 Sep 2016 at 23:50:39 +0900, Mark Fletcher wrote:
> ...
> > 
> > The colour abnormality could be simply be because the Canon driver is
> > rubbish at colour management or it needs adjusting. There is a driver in
> > printer-driver-gutenprint which is for your printer; I'd suggest testing
> > that with the printer. It comes with the cups-calibrate program.
> 
> Not to forget the color profiles delivered by vendor, but usually one could
> setup different management profiles also in the cups driver on the
> frontend/backend side.
> I would check there too. It must be something like RGB, CYMK, native etc.
> 

Yes, I have fiddled with that in the past, on printing from say evince 
or gimp, I don't recall getting it to make any difference. Which 
probably means something is overriding it, or "compensating" in some 
way, trying to be clever...

Mark

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Mark Fletcher]

On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 05:17:40PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> 
> The colour abnormality could be simply be because the Canon driver is
> rubbish at colour management or it needs adjusting. There is a driver in
> printer-driver-gutenprint which is for your printer; I'd suggest testing
> that with the printer. It comes with the cups-calibrate program.
> 

Thanks. I am using the Gutenprint driver. I see cups-calibrate in my 
future -- didn't know that existed. I'd been sort of hidebound by the 
assumption that everything from Windows must have been going through the 
same CUPS path as everything from Linux -- but the evidence sort of 
disproves that doesn't it. Thanks, I'll look into cups-calibrate.

Mark

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[deloptes]

Brian wrote:

> On Mon 26 Sep 2016 at 23:50:39 +0900, Mark Fletcher wrote:
...
> 
> The colour abnormality could be simply be because the Canon driver is
> rubbish at colour management or it needs adjusting. There is a driver in
> printer-driver-gutenprint which is for your printer; I'd suggest testing
> that with the printer. It comes with the cups-calibrate program.

Not to forget the color profiles delivered by vendor, but usually one could
setup different management profiles also in the cups driver on the
frontend/backend side.
I would check there too. It must be something like RGB, CYMK, native etc.

regards

Re: Canon printer minor quibble

[Brian]

On Mon 26 Sep 2016 at 23:50:39 +0900, Mark Fletcher wrote:

> Finally getting around to raising an issue I have faced for years and 
> never made much inroads into...
> 
> I have a Canon iX6530 A4 / A3 inkjet printer purchased in Japan. It is 
> connected via a USB cable to my Jessie PC. I have the Canon 
> iX6500-series driver installed. It seems to work fine.
> 
> I have shared the printer via CUPS and, sometime back, also fannied 
> around with AirPrint in a way I don't completely remember as well as 
> fannying around with samba print sharing in the apparently mistaken 
> belief that these were needed to share the printer with Windows.
> 
> I am successfully able to print to the printer from the Jessie box it is 
> connected to, and also from my iOS devices of various stripes and ages, 
> Windows 7 VMs running on the Jessie machine, a stretch box also on my 
> network -- in short, anything I try to.
> 
> The issue is that, when I print a photo natively from Jessie, the 
> colours come out rather dark and the overall resulting picture isn't 
> very good. Photos in particular suffer for this but I even notice it 
> with coloured text -- for example printing a PDF with a table where a 
> cell is shaded in green, it comes out of the printer looking nearer to 
> black. It's green, but it's very, very dark.
> 
> On the other hand, when I print the same images from the Windows VMs, 
> they come out great. Colours are better balanced and the photos look 
> much better. The above-mentioned PDF table cell comes out looking green 
> not black.
> 
> Keep in mind the only route to this printer is through the USB cable 
> attached to the Jessie box. I don't know how data from the Windows 
> machines is getting to CUPS, exactly (Windows sees a network printer but 
> I don't know which of the redundant setups I did is serving it) but once 
> it gets there everything from that point, most notably the printer 
> driver, is the same.

I know nothing about Windows 7 or VMs, although I believe the latter
allows an OS to be run in just the same way it would on bare metal.

How the data from Windows gets to CUPS isn't, I think, important,
although with the Stretch box the network would be involved. My
understanding is that the data coming from Windows has already been
processed by Windows, so therein lies one difference between the file
arriving at the CUPS server from Windows and that from Jessie.

The Jessie file will be sent as-is to be filtered and rendered by CUPS.
The Windows file could very well just pass through CUPS and go directly
to the printer. Only an error_log would reveal what is happening.

The colour abnormality could be simply be because the Canon driver is
rubbish at colour management or it needs adjusting. There is a driver in
printer-driver-gutenprint which is for your printer; I'd suggest testing
that with the printer. It comes with the cups-calibrate program.

-- 
Brian.

Canon printer minor quibble

[Mark Fletcher]

Finally getting around to raising an issue I have faced for years and 
never made much inroads into...

I have a Canon iX6530 A4 / A3 inkjet printer purchased in Japan. It is 
connected via a USB cable to my Jessie PC. I have the Canon 
iX6500-series driver installed. It seems to work fine.

I have shared the printer via CUPS and, sometime back, also fannied 
around with AirPrint in a way I don't completely remember as well as 
fannying around with samba print sharing in the apparently mistaken 
belief that these were needed to share the printer with Windows.

I am successfully able to print to the printer from the Jessie box it is 
connected to, and also from my iOS devices of various stripes and ages, 
Windows 7 VMs running on the Jessie machine, a stretch box also on my 
network -- in short, anything I try to.

The issue is that, when I print a photo natively from Jessie, the 
colours come out rather dark and the overall resulting picture isn't 
very good. Photos in particular suffer for this but I even notice it 
with coloured text -- for example printing a PDF with a table where a 
cell is shaded in green, it comes out of the printer looking nearer to 
black. It's green, but it's very, very dark.

On the other hand, when I print the same images from the Windows VMs, 
they come out great. Colours are better balanced and the photos look 
much better. The above-mentioned PDF table cell comes out looking green 
not black.

Keep in mind the only route to this printer is through the USB cable 
attached to the Jessie box. I don't know how data from the Windows 
machines is getting to CUPS, exactly (Windows sees a network printer but 
I don't know which of the redundant setups I did is serving it) but once 
it gets there everything from that point, most notably the printer 
driver, is the same.

I can just print from Windows when I want a good quality outcome, but it 
doesn't sit well with me that Windows is doing something better than 
Jessie, so I want to fix it. Any idea what I should be looking at?

Thanks

Mark