Article View: fa.laser-lovers
Article #55Re: Services and a question
From: laser-lovers
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1985 02:07
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1985 02:07
34 lines
2658 bytes
2658 bytes
From: Robert Morris <ram%umass-boston.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa> At Interleaf we support both protocols (from different hosts). The spp is more robust and also capabable of reporting more error conditions. The robustness may not be an issue on short cables. The byte stream protocol seems to be more useful than the spp in a VMS environment, because VMS has such an inflexible spooling system (for example, it is a little tough to get it to send things transparently and not add special control characters to help the printer along....). On Sun systems we support the spp and do a fair bit of printer condition reporting. btw, old versions of Imagen's spp made it difficult to force a page out of the printer just because it was fully sent to the host (namely, if the page boundary did not occur on a packet boundary nor on the job boundary, their software did not send an incomplete packet (other than at the job end)). I don't know if later software fixed this, but one can envision circumstances where one might want the host to pause in the middle of the job and await operator intervention at the printer, some schemes for which require sending partial impress jobs and continuing later under software control. For example, if you want to do double sided printing on an 8/300 and provide for timeouts (i.e. the printer should not require intervention to continue if no one turns the paper withing N minutes), you are lead to such a solution. So, if you modified Imagen software to implement this you may not get quite enough use of the spp without a little thought. I believe there is a similar problem with ethernet protocols, and it may be hopeless with the byte stream protocol. A nice hardware solution(?) would be if printer vendors could insure that there is a way for an operator to do something physical at the printer which could be detected by the host. Then an operator who successfully changed paper, etc., could notify the host software to continue. This seems simpler than the elaborate printer control mechanisms in Interpress. bob morris interleaf, inc. and UMASS/Boston
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1648@uw-beaver>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!linus!decvax!tektronix!uw-beaver!laser-loversShow Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site uw-beaver Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!linus!decvax!tektronix!uw-beaver!laser-lovers From: laser-lovers@uw-beaver Newsgroups: fa.laser-lovers Subject: Re: Services and a question Message-ID: <1648@uw-beaver> Date: Sun, 13-Oct-85 22:07:44 EDT Article-I.D.: uw-beave.1648 Posted: Sun Oct 13 22:07:44 1985 Date-Received: Tue, 15-Oct-85 06:22:18 EDT Sender: yenbut@uw-beaver Organization: U of Washington Computer Science Lines: 35