Author Topic: Problem creating PS files after running ArcaOS Package Manager Update  (Read 1340 times)

Martin Vieregg

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 277
  • Karma: +2/-0
    • View Profile
I have got two ArcaOS installations. On one I have processed ArcaOS Package Manger update, on the other not. The updated system has now problems with generating PS files. When creating a PS file from an application, the PS file is larger than normal. When executing Ghostscript to generate a PDF file, the size is much higher than normal and fonts, both Type 1 and Truetype, gets an ugly bitmap replacement.

These printing/PS/PDF related packages are still identical on both systems:
cups* 2.2.13-1
cups-filters* 1.25.6-1
fontconfig 2.13.1-4
fontconfig-legacy 2.11.94-1
ghostscript 9.18-7
ghostcript-fonts 6.0-1
gutenprint* 5.3.3-2

Which other packages can cause this problem? I have to find the package which is responsible for this problem.

Tom

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 108
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • View Profile
I have got two ArcaOS installations. On one I have processed ArcaOS Package Manger update, on the other not. The updated system has now problems with generating PS files. When creating a PS file from an application, the PS file is larger than normal. When executing Ghostscript to generate a PDF file, the size is much higher than normal and fonts, both Type 1 and Truetype, gets an ugly bitmap replacement.

Why not check the file anpm.log for entries around the date and time of the update after which the trouble started?
Look for lines that start with "Executing:" which contain as name of the executed script yum_update.py
They will tell you which packages were updated, and wether the updated succeded or failed.

Dariusz Piatkowski

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1135
  • Karma: +24/-0
    • View Profile
Try what Tom suggest, but you could get there in a slightly easier way:

1) run 'yum history'
2) pick the transaction ID that's closest to the time you think when the problem started
3) run 'yum history info ID', where ID= what you found above

...that will show you the details of what package was updated.

Martin Vieregg

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 277
  • Karma: +2/-0
    • View Profile
I made only one update session and then the problem occurs. I think it is the best way to run the update packages step-by-step und to observe if PS/PDF is working or not. I will report here.

ivan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1363
  • Karma: +15/-0
    • View Profile
Maybe I'm getting slow in my old age but I wonder why you are doing a two step operation to get a PDF file - why not go directly to the PDF?

Dariusz Piatkowski

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1135
  • Karma: +24/-0
    • View Profile
Maybe I'm getting slow in my old age but I wonder why you are doing a two step operation to get a PDF file - why not go directly to the PDF?

I think Martin is saying that on one of the two systems he has BOTH generating a PS as well as PDF file results in much larger file sizes.

ivan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1363
  • Karma: +15/-0
    • View Profile
Maybe, I read it as he produces PS files which he then converts to PDF using ghostscript hence my asking about why use a two part process rather than going direct to PDF.

Alfredo Fernández Díaz

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 29
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
why use a two part process rather than going direct to PDF.
There may be reasons for this as well, for example adding "pdfmark" information (links and hyperlinks, table of contents entries aka bookmarks, etc.) that an application won't generate by itself. You create the PS file, add the pdfmarks to it or an additional file, and convert the whole thing to PDF with GS. I do this all the time with WordPerfect for DOS.
« Last Edit: June 25, 2022, 05:05:36 pm by Alfredo Fernández Díaz »

ivan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1363
  • Karma: +15/-0
    • View Profile
All of that can be done to a PDF file by using jPDFtweak - a java application.

Martin Vieregg

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 277
  • Karma: +2/-0
    • View Profile
Sorry for the wrong track... I now realized that the problems refer to the choice of the default printer which I changed at the same day when running the updates. But it is a bit strange, because both printers are PS printers.
To easy handle updates, I have copied the whole system partition to a backup directory while running another OS/2 installation with XCOPY * X: /H /O /T /S /E /R /V.  So I can simply restore old stable working states of my main system. From SSD to SSD, it takes less than 2 minutes... That is much faster and more secure than running the downgrade functionality of Package Manager.
« Last Edit: June 27, 2022, 12:10:20 am by Martin Vieregg »

ivan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1363
  • Karma: +15/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Problem creating PS files after running ArcaOS Package Manager Update
« Reply #10 on: June 27, 2022, 12:31:59 am »
Hi Martin,

If your printers are real postscript printers I would think your best way forward would be to use the PSPRINT driver with the PPD for each printer imported.  That is what I have done for my two Brother Laser printers (DCP-9020cdw and HL-3170cdw with the DCP being available for scanning).  They also work from my Linux Mint computers.
Doing it that way cuts out the messing about with CUPS.

Alfredo Fernández Díaz

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 29
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Problem creating PS files after running ArcaOS Package Manager Update
« Reply #11 on: June 27, 2022, 04:31:33 pm »
[...] it is a bit strange, because both printers are PS printers.
Guessing here, but probably one of the PS drivers simply generates simpler, more compatible (and verbose!) PS code with bitmap font replacements and such. Sub-optimal for producing PDFs, but there should be no noticeable difference in output when actually printing at the right resolution.

Alex Taylor

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 303
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Problem creating PS files after running ArcaOS Package Manager Update
« Reply #12 on: July 13, 2022, 01:18:37 pm »
It seems like the one printer is not embedding TrueType fonts. The IBM PSCRIPT driver doesn't support this. The newer PSPRINT driver does, but it requires a few things, namely:
  • The printer has to support it (i.e. the PPD must have the TTRasterizer attribute set to Type42)
  • The embedding feature has to be turned on in the printer driver properties.
  • The print job properties must have the number of downloaded fonts set to a high enough number to cover all the fonts being used in the document (20-30 is usually sufficient).
  • The fonts specified in the document must actually be installed on your system.
  • Each embedded font can be no larger than 2 MB (1MB if the printer has no FreeVM defined), or half the printer's RAM, whichever is less.
« Last Edit: July 13, 2022, 01:20:58 pm by Alex Taylor »