Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #174869 > unrolled thread

hplip and use of the "driver plugin"

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Jape Person <japers@comcast.net> - 2016-11-19 02:40 +0100
    Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-19 12:50 +0100
      Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Jape Person <japers@comcast.net> - 2016-11-19 19:00 +0100
    Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@debian.org> - 2016-11-19 15:40 +0100
      Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-19 17:00 +0100
        Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@debian.org> - 2016-11-19 17:40 +0100
          Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-19 18:40 +0100
          Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Jape Person <japers@comcast.net> - 2016-11-19 19:30 +0100
            Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-19 21:10 +0100
              Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Jape Person <japers@comcast.net> - 2016-11-19 22:40 +0100
                Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-20 21:00 +0100
                  Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Jape Person <japers@comcast.net> - 2016-11-21 00:00 +0100
                  Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" "James P. Wallen" <jpwallen@comcast.net> - 2016-11-21 00:20 +0100
                  Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Richard Hector <richard@walnut.gen.nz> - 2016-11-23 12:30 +0100
                    Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-23 13:00 +0100
                      Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2016-11-23 15:10 +0100
                      Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-24 19:30 +0100
              Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-24 21:50 +0100
        Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-19 18:10 +0100
          Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-19 18:50 +0100
        Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Jape Person <japers@comcast.net> - 2016-11-19 19:20 +0100
          Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-19 20:50 +0100
            Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Jape Person <japers@comcast.net> - 2016-11-19 22:30 +0100
              Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-12-04 20:00 +0100
                Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Jape Person <japers@comcast.net> - 2016-12-06 04:10 +0100
      Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Jape Person <japers@comcast.net> - 2016-11-19 19:10 +0100
        Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-11-21 23:30 +0100
    Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Jape Person <japers@comcast.net> - 2016-12-03 19:20 +0100
      Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-12-03 20:20 +0100
        Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Jape Person <japers@comcast.net> - 2016-12-03 21:20 +0100
          Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-12-04 12:50 +0100
            Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" rhkramer@gmail.com - 2016-12-04 16:00 +0100
              Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-12-04 16:50 +0100
              Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Jape Person <japers@comcast.net> - 2016-12-06 04:00 +0100
                Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-12-07 00:50 +0100
                  Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Jape Person <japers@comcast.net> - 2016-12-07 02:50 +0100
                    Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Richard Hector <richard@walnut.gen.nz> - 2016-12-07 09:00 +0100
                      Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Jape Person <japers@comcast.net> - 2016-12-07 16:20 +0100
        Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-12-03 21:30 +0100
          Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Jape Person <japers@comcast.net> - 2016-12-03 21:40 +0100
            Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Marc Shapiro <marcnshap@gmail.com> - 2016-12-06 00:40 +0100
              Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Jape Person <japers@comcast.net> - 2016-12-06 04:10 +0100
                Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Marc Shapiro <marcnshap@gmail.com> - 2016-12-06 06:40 +0100
          Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Fred <fred@blakemfg.com> - 2016-12-04 02:00 +0100
            Re: hplip and use of the "driver plugin" Jape Person <japers@comcast.net> - 2016-12-04 06:40 +0100

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

#174869 — hplip and use of the "driver plugin"

Hi.

I'm getting ready to replace all of our old equipment that has been used 
for well over a decade in our home network.

I decided to try to do everything with FOSS -- open source Luxul router, 
open-source-only drivers for everything on the libreboot PCs. But I've 
run into a snag with the printer and scanner.

I was going to make life easy for myself and use hplip with something 
like an HP MFP. But all of the new HP MFP and scanners seem to make use 
of a "driver plugin". If I'm understanding correctly, a user has to run 
the hp-setup program that comes with hplip. That program actually 
downloads this proprietary blob during installation of the printer. This 
is not at all what I want. So far, the only MFPs and scanners I've found 
that don't use the driver plugin are either FCC Class A devices so not 
really suitable for home use or are at end of support. There are a 
couple of single function laser printers that might work, but I'd still 
have to find a scanner that doesn't require the blob. HP doesn't appear 
to make one.

What about hplip? Doesn't inclusion of the hp-setup program in hplip 
sort of violate the spirit of having only FOSS in the main repository 
when executing it will result in installation of a proprietary blob? I 
just ran it as a test on one of the old OfficeJets, and I didn't see 
bubkiss about it installing proprietary software.

I've been pretty ill and not paying careful attention to the list for a 
long time now. has this already been discussed? If so, didn't find any 
pertinent threads.

This seems to be a step backward in HP's technical support for open 
source software. I'm disappointed.

So, does anyone know of a laser MFP (or a separate laser printer and 
scanner) which I can hook up to my network (preferably wirelessly) and 
use in Debian testing without violating my planned avoidance of 
proprietary software and drivers?

Can I use simpler or lower level drivers for the printer and scanner 
components of something like one of the HP Color LaserJet 477 series?

Thanks for any help you can provide. I am sending an e-mail to HP tech 
support to see if they can help, but my foray into that area by phone 
today wasn't promising.

Thanks,
JP

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#174878

On Fri 18 Nov 2016 at 20:34:03 -0500, Jape Person wrote:

> I'm getting ready to replace all of our old equipment that has been used for
> well over a decade in our home network.
> 
> I decided to try to do everything with FOSS -- open source Luxul router,
> open-source-only drivers for everything on the libreboot PCs. But I've run
> into a snag with the printer and scanner.
> 
> I was going to make life easy for myself and use hplip with something like
> an HP MFP. But all of the new HP MFP and scanners seem to make use of a
> "driver plugin". If I'm understanding correctly, a user has to run the
> hp-setup program that comes with hplip. That program actually downloads this
> proprietary blob during installation of the printer. This is not at all what
> I want. So far, the only MFPs and scanners I've found that don't use the
> driver plugin are either FCC Class A devices so not really suitable for home
> use or are at end of support. There are a couple of single function laser
> printers that might work, but I'd still have to find a scanner that doesn't
> require the blob. HP doesn't appear to make one.

You've probably seen

  http://hplipopensource.com/hplip-web/supported_devices/combined.html

so can match up your requirement with what is on the market from HP. It
does appear to be limited but your choice could be widened by including
inkjet printers in the list.

> What about hplip? Doesn't inclusion of the hp-setup program in hplip sort of
> violate the spirit of having only FOSS in the main repository when executing
> it will result in installation of a proprietary blob? I just ran it as a
> test on one of the old OfficeJets, and I didn't see bubkiss about it
> installing proprietary software.

hplip is all free software. The plugin is not in Debian so the stuation
there is kosher. You choose to download it and can have hp-setup help
you if you wish. There is no way round having it for some printing or
scanning functions.

> I've been pretty ill and not paying careful attention to the list for a long
> time now. has this already been discussed? If so, didn't find any pertinent
> threads.
> 
> This seems to be a step backward in HP's technical support for open source
> software. I'm disappointed.

HP support the free software 100%. Just as the Linux kernel and Debian
supports free wireless drivers which require firmware.

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#174891

On 11/19/2016 06:48 AM, Brian wrote:
> You've probably seen
>
>   http://hplipopensource.com/hplip-web/supported_devices/combined.html
>
> so can match up your requirement with what is on the market from HP. It
> does appear to be limited but your choice could be widened by including
> inkjet printers in the list.

Yes, thank you. That's the information that had me asking the questions. 
Almost all of the devices which do what I want them to do either a) 
require the driver plugin or b) are nearing end of support.

> hplip is all free software. The plugin is not in Debian so the stuation
> there is kosher. You choose to download it and can have hp-setup help
> you if you wish. There is no way round having it for some printing or
> scanning functions.

Okay, I can see that logic. My concern was that a test that I did last 
evening with the OfficeJet 6302 and hp-setup did (apparently) install 
the driver plugin, but did NOT inform me that proprietary software was 
being installed. (The HP site does say that there is a license document 
with which the user has to indicate agreement. I didn't see it -- maybe 
because I wasn't using the gui version? Or maybe because I was tired and 
hitting the Enter key too rapidly?

> HP support the free software 100%. Just as the Linux kernel and Debian
> supports free wireless drivers which require firmware.

Okay. Again, I think I see the reasoning, but I thought that the 
hp-setup / driver plugin was a "new" feature. I guess it isn't. I'm just 
out-of-date.

Thank you, Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#174883

On Fri, 18 Nov 2016, Jape Person wrote:
> What about hplip? Doesn't inclusion of the hp-setup program in hplip sort of
> violate the spirit of having only FOSS in the main repository when executing

No, it doesn't violate the spirit.  HPLIP is FLOSS, including the
hp-setup program itself.  The binary blob is minor funcionality as far
as HPLIP usage is concerned (although it isn't minor functionality for
the unfortunate onwers of the subset of HP devices that require the
binary blob to work).

Now, if HPLIP was composed only of the hp-setup program, *and* hp-setup
was only good for downloading/interfacing to the binary blob in the
first place (as far as I recall, it does more than that), it would be
"contrib" material (instead of Debian main material).

That is not true, however.  So, HPLIP belongs in Debian main.  A package
in main cannot build packages for contrib or non-free (and vice-versa),
and it doesn't make sense to duplicate the entire HPLIP *source* package
just to have a neutered-by-patching hp-setup utility in main, and a
complete one in contrib.

> it will result in installation of a proprietary blob? I just ran it as a

Well, Debian is not in the business of neutering software to remove
support for binary blobs[1].  There are Linux distros that cather for
that market, though, such as Linux-Libre.

[1] We don't distribute such blobs in Debian main, but software in main
may make use of such blobs when available -- such as the Linux kernel.
And while the blobs would go in non-free if their license permits that
much, the software that downloads or uses it may go in contrib, non-free
or even Debian main, depending a _lot_ on the specific details.

> I've been pretty ill and not paying careful attention to the list for a long
> time now. has this already been discussed? If so, didn't find any pertinent
> threads.

Yes, it was.  Somewhat recently, too.  I don't recall the thread,
though.

> This seems to be a step backward in HP's technical support for open source
> software. I'm disappointed.

HP's printer division is nowadays very different from the one you might
know from a decade ago.  You might want to inform yourself better about
their recent attempts at ink cartridge lockdown, for example.

Basically, if an HP printer is not a high-end model that has a
software-driver-less network port that can take PDF/1A directly using
the IPP protocol natively, I wouldn't recommend it.  If it does, I'd
still recommend that you get yourself informed about its operational
costs (ink/toner, replacement fusers and periodic maintenance kit) first
-- but that is valid for any printer vendor.

> So, does anyone know of a laser MFP (or a separate laser printer and
> scanner) which I can hook up to my network (preferably wirelessly) and use
> in Debian testing without violating my planned avoidance of proprietary
> software and drivers?

I'd like to know that, too.  I need a new home color printer, my
10-year-old HP PhotoSmart (blobless) MFP has finally broken down and
good second-hand parts are not easy to find in Brazil :-(

-- 
  Henrique Holschuh

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#174884

On Sat 19 Nov 2016 at 12:30:47 -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:

> On Fri, 18 Nov 2016, Jape Person wrote:
> > What about hplip? Doesn't inclusion of the hp-setup program in hplip sort of
> > violate the spirit of having only FOSS in the main repository when executing
> 
> No, it doesn't violate the spirit.  HPLIP is FLOSS, including the
> hp-setup program itself.  The binary blob is minor funcionality as far
> as HPLIP usage is concerned (although it isn't minor functionality for
> the unfortunate onwers of the subset of HP devices that require the
> binary blob to work).
> 
> Now, if HPLIP was composed only of the hp-setup program, *and* hp-setup
> was only good for downloading/interfacing to the binary blob in the
> first place (as far as I recall, it does more than that), it would be
> "contrib" material (instead of Debian main material).

hp-plugin's sole purpose is to download and install the plugin but, by
the same argument, it still doesn't make hplip a candidate for contrib.
 
> That is not true, however.  So, HPLIP belongs in Debian main.  A package
> in main cannot build packages for contrib or non-free (and vice-versa),
> and it doesn't make sense to duplicate the entire HPLIP *source* package
> just to have a neutered-by-patching hp-setup utility in main, and a
> complete one in contrib.
> 
> > it will result in installation of a proprietary blob? I just ran it as a
> 
> Well, Debian is not in the business of neutering software to remove
> support for binary blobs[1].  There are Linux distros that cather for
> that market, though, such as Linux-Libre.
> 
> [1] We don't distribute such blobs in Debian main, but software in main
> may make use of such blobs when available -- such as the Linux kernel.
> And while the blobs would go in non-free if their license permits that
> much, the software that downloads or uses it may go in contrib, non-free
> or even Debian main, depending a _lot_ on the specific details.
> 
> > I've been pretty ill and not paying careful attention to the list for a long
> > time now. has this already been discussed? If so, didn't find any pertinent
> > threads.
> 
> Yes, it was.  Somewhat recently, too.  I don't recall the thread,
> though.

It was sub-thread of another thread. Starts here:

 https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2016/10/msg01016.html
 
> > This seems to be a step backward in HP's technical support for open source
> > software. I'm disappointed.
> 
> HP's printer division is nowadays very different from the one you might
> know from a decade ago.  You might want to inform yourself better about
> their recent attempts at ink cartridge lockdown, for example.
> 
> Basically, if an HP printer is not a high-end model that has a
> software-driver-less network port that can take PDF/1A directly using
> the IPP protocol natively, I wouldn't recommend it.  If it does, I'd
> still recommend that you get yourself informed about its operational
> costs (ink/toner, replacement fusers and periodic maintenance kit) first
> -- but that is valid for any printer vendor.
> 
> > So, does anyone know of a laser MFP (or a separate laser printer and
> > scanner) which I can hook up to my network (preferably wirelessly) and use
> > in Debian testing without violating my planned avoidance of proprietary
> > software and drivers?
> 
> I'd like to know that, too.  I need a new home color printer, my
> 10-year-old HP PhotoSmart (blobless) MFP has finally broken down and
> good second-hand parts are not easy to find in Brazil :-(

Why is it important for the printer to be blobless? Look at it this way:

A printer is choc-a-bloc full of firmware. None of this firmware is
accessible to a user, even if something like an interpreter is based on
an open standard such as PostScript. Indeed, there may be a rasteriser
which itself uses a proprietary format such as URF.

Suppose there are some bugs in the firmware; for example, the AirPrint
facility ceases to work reliably with an i-device. This has happened in
the past and the manufacturer provided a binary blob to fix it. What
would you do?

Ok, I'll tell you what I would do. I would get the blob and upload it to
the printer to bring it back to a working state. I would do the same for
a troublesome PDF rasteriser. I see no difference between doing that and
getting an hplip plugin to have the printer (or scanner) working at its
full potential.

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#174886

On Sat, 19 Nov 2016, Brian wrote:
> > I'd like to know that, too.  I need a new home color printer, my
> > 10-year-old HP PhotoSmart (blobless) MFP has finally broken down and
> > good second-hand parts are not easy to find in Brazil :-(
> 
> Why is it important for the printer to be blobless? Look at it this way:

Are we talking about printer firmware, or host-cpu device drivers?

All of your reply is only relevant for device firmware (runs in the
device).  But I thought this was about a binary-only driver blob that
runs in the host OS ?  Or did I misunderstand?

-- 
  Henrique Holschuh

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#174889

On Sat 19 Nov 2016 at 14:31:49 -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:

> On Sat, 19 Nov 2016, Brian wrote:
> > > I'd like to know that, too.  I need a new home color printer, my
> > > 10-year-old HP PhotoSmart (blobless) MFP has finally broken down and
> > > good second-hand parts are not easy to find in Brazil :-(
> > 
> > Why is it important for the printer to be blobless? Look at it this way:
> 
> Are we talking about printer firmware, or host-cpu device drivers?

Both. Although, admittedly, I concentrated on firmware.

> All of your reply is only relevant for device firmware (runs in the
> device).  But I thought this was about a binary-only driver blob that
> runs in the host OS ?  Or did I misunderstand?

Knowing the printer model would bring some focus to the matter. We are
both right but each of us has looked at two different aspects of the
plugin model.

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#174895

On 11/19/2016 11:31 AM, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Nov 2016, Brian wrote:
>>> I'd like to know that, too.  I need a new home color printer, my
>>> 10-year-old HP PhotoSmart (blobless) MFP has finally broken down and
>>> good second-hand parts are not easy to find in Brazil :-(
>>
>> Why is it important for the printer to be blobless? Look at it this way:
>
> Are we talking about printer firmware, or host-cpu device drivers?
>
> All of your reply is only relevant for device firmware (runs in the
> device).  But I thought this was about a binary-only driver blob that
> runs in the host OS ?  Or did I misunderstand?
>
I'm pretty sure it's a host-cpu device driver.

http://hplipopensource.com/node/309

Yeah, if it ran only in the device, I'd be okay with it.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#174900

On Sat 19 Nov 2016 at 13:21:23 -0500, Jape Person wrote:

> On 11/19/2016 11:31 AM, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> >On Sat, 19 Nov 2016, Brian wrote:
> >>>I'd like to know that, too.  I need a new home color printer, my
> >>>10-year-old HP PhotoSmart (blobless) MFP has finally broken down and
> >>>good second-hand parts are not easy to find in Brazil :-(
> >>
> >>Why is it important for the printer to be blobless? Look at it this way:
> >
> >Are we talking about printer firmware, or host-cpu device drivers?
> >
> >All of your reply is only relevant for device firmware (runs in the
> >device).  But I thought this was about a binary-only driver blob that
> >runs in the host OS ?  Or did I misunderstand?
> >
> I'm pretty sure it's a host-cpu device driver.
> 
> http://hplipopensource.com/node/309

Sorry to be awkward, but what does "it's" refer to?

The plugin contains *.fw files and libraries. A firmware file is uploaded to
the printer when it is switched on. Quite what the libraries do I do not
know but my assumption is they are involved in this and the host-based
management of the printer. Enlightenment would be appreciated.

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#174905

On 11/19/2016 03:09 PM, Brian wrote:
> On Sat 19 Nov 2016 at 13:21:23 -0500, Jape Person wrote:
>
>> On 11/19/2016 11:31 AM, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
>>> On Sat, 19 Nov 2016, Brian wrote:
>>>>> I'd like to know that, too.  I need a new home color printer, my
>>>>> 10-year-old HP PhotoSmart (blobless) MFP has finally broken down and
>>>>> good second-hand parts are not easy to find in Brazil :-(
>>>>
>>>> Why is it important for the printer to be blobless? Look at it this way:
>>>
>>> Are we talking about printer firmware, or host-cpu device drivers?
>>>
>>> All of your reply is only relevant for device firmware (runs in the
>>> device).  But I thought this was about a binary-only driver blob that
>>> runs in the host OS ?  Or did I misunderstand?
>>>
>> I'm pretty sure it's a host-cpu device driver.
>>
>> http://hplipopensource.com/node/309
>
> Sorry to be awkward, but what does "it's" refer to?
>

Uh, I'm the awkward one here. That's why I'm asking for help.

> The plugin contains *.fw files and libraries. A firmware file is uploaded to
> the printer when it is switched on. Quite what the libraries do I do not
> know but my assumption is they are involved in this and the host-based
> management of the printer. Enlightenment would be appreciated.
>

Let's not start with unreasonable expectations. The likelihood that I 
will enlighten you in such a matter is vanishingly small.

I didn't find any information this specific about the driver plugin. If 
you can steer me toward the relevant information I would appreciate it. 
I read information at all the links that seemed as though they could be 
pertinent from the hplipopensource.com location.

So, are you saying that nothing within that driver plugin gets invoked 
by or interacts with the host system? It's just some firmware that gets 
copied to the printer and some libraries which reside on the host and 
which interact with the printer. If that's the case, then my concern 
about the driver plugin is a tempest in a teapot.

It still would seem to beg the question as to why the system would be 
designed this way. But I'm not a printer hardware designer, and I don't 
know what requirements are placed on those guys by the production and 
delivery schedules. Maybe it's just a workaround to help HP get the most 
up-to-date stuff out the door in the most timely manner possible.

At any rate, I can probably fulfill my requirements my buying a little 
more hardware than I had originally intended. And I appreciate the 
efforts you and Henrique have made on my behalf.

If I should learn anything interesting from HP tech support I'll try to 
come back with it.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#174936

On Sat 19 Nov 2016 at 16:38:20 -0500, Jape Person wrote:

> On 11/19/2016 03:09 PM, Brian wrote:
> >
> >Sorry to be awkward, but what does "it's" refer to?
> >
> 
> Uh, I'm the awkward one here. That's why I'm asking for help.

Not at all. I've learned a thing or two from this thread. For example,
I hadn't appreciated the extent to which the laserjet multifunction
devices were dependent on the plugin, whereas the MFP inkjets are not
(for now).
 
> >The plugin contains *.fw files and libraries. A firmware file is uploaded to
> >the printer when it is switched on. Quite what the libraries do I do not
> >know but my assumption is they are involved in this and the host-based
> >management of the printer. Enlightenment would be appreciated.
> >
> 
> Let's not start with unreasonable expectations. The likelihood that I will
> enlighten you in such a matter is vanishingly small.

Others are reading this thread too. :)

> I didn't find any information this specific about the driver plugin. If you
> can steer me toward the relevant information I would appreciate it. I read
> information at all the links that seemed as though they could be pertinent
> from the hplipopensource.com location.

The plugin can be downloaded from openprinting.org and its contents
examined. Or install it with hp-plugin and look at /usr/share/hplip
to see what you get. Delete the files by hand afterwards. Firmware
appears to be only for a few specific printers and it is the faxing,
scanning and printing libraries which are used for the majority (or
perhaps all) of multifunctionals. Closed source; we cannot tell.

> So, are you saying that nothing within that driver plugin gets invoked by or
> interacts with the host system? It's just some firmware that gets copied to
> the printer and some libraries which reside on the host and which interact
> with the printer. If that's the case, then my concern about the driver
> plugin is a tempest in a teapot.

No, I am not saying that. I think hplip looks for and interacts with
the libraries if they are needed for a particular device. Last time I
set up a print queue (without having the printer) for a device which
needed a plugin, CUPS relayed an error message from the hpcups driver.
It is something I need to look into when I have the time.

I'd stick with your original concern.

> It still would seem to beg the question as to why the system would be
> designed this way. But I'm not a printer hardware designer, and I don't know
> what requirements are placed on those guys by the production and delivery
> schedules. Maybe it's just a workaround to help HP get the most up-to-date
> stuff out the door in the most timely manner possible.

Dunno. It could be as simple as HP licensing software from elsewhere
for printing and scanning and not having the rights to open source it.
>From their point of view re-inventing the wheel doesn't make sense.

For me, I'd take an HP laser multifunctional because I would want the
copying facility. For you. you may have to widen your search to other
vendors to get separate printing and scanning devices.

It depends, also, on how pragmatic a user is. HP could be seen as a
responsive, trustworthy and reliable company. The fact is that most
printer manufacturers have some element of non-free software as part
of their modern offerings at the inexpensive end of their product
line.

> At any rate, I can probably fulfill my requirements my buying a little more
> hardware than I had originally intended. And I appreciate the efforts you
> and Henrique have made on my behalf.
> 
> If I should learn anything interesting from HP tech support I'll try to come
> back with it.

Considering HP say they do not offer Linux support directly, you are
doing well.

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#174942

My apologies. Accidentally replied using another e-mail address from our 
business.

I'm resending from the proper account, japers@comcast.net.

On 11/20/2016 02:52 PM, Brian wrote:
> On Sat 19 Nov 2016 at 16:38:20 -0500, Jape Person wrote:
>
>> On 11/19/2016 03:09 PM, Brian wrote:
>>>
>>> Sorry to be awkward, but what does "it's" refer to?
>>>
>>
>> Uh, I'm the awkward one here. That's why I'm asking for help.
>
> Not at all. I've learned a thing or two from this thread. For example,
> I hadn't appreciated the extent to which the laserjet multifunction
> devices were dependent on the plugin, whereas the MFP inkjets are not
> (for now).
>

Yes, I believe I saw statements on the hp site indicating that they
intend to start supporting more and more devices, including new inkjet
MFPs, with the driver-plugin model.

>>> The plugin contains *.fw files and libraries. A firmware file is uploaded to
>>> the printer when it is switched on. Quite what the libraries do I do not
>>> know but my assumption is they are involved in this and the host-based
>>> management of the printer. Enlightenment would be appreciated.
>>>
>>
>> Let's not start with unreasonable expectations. The likelihood that I will
>> enlighten you in such a matter is vanishingly small.
>
> Others are reading this thread too. :)
>
>> I didn't find any information this specific about the driver plugin. If you
>> can steer me toward the relevant information I would appreciate it. I read
>> information at all the links that seemed as though they could be pertinent
>> from the hplipopensource.com location.
>
> The plugin can be downloaded from openprinting.org and its contents
> examined. Or install it with hp-plugin and look at /usr/share/hplip
> to see what you get. Delete the files by hand afterwards. Firmware
> appears to be only for a few specific printers and it is the faxing,
> scanning and printing libraries which are used for the majority (or
> perhaps all) of multifunctionals. Closed source; we cannot tell.
>

I'll look at that. I had ASSumed that there was a different
driver-plugin for each different model, so didn't even look at the
direct download option.

>> So, are you saying that nothing within that driver plugin gets invoked by or
>> interacts with the host system? It's just some firmware that gets copied to
>> the printer and some libraries which reside on the host and which interact
>> with the printer. If that's the case, then my concern about the driver
>> plugin is a tempest in a teapot.
>
> No, I am not saying that. I think hplip looks for and interacts with
> the libraries if they are needed for a particular device. Last time I
> set up a print queue (without having the printer) for a device which
> needed a plugin, CUPS relayed an error message from the hpcups driver.
> It is something I need to look into when I have the time.
>
> I'd stick with your original concern.
>

Yup. I'm going to just slowly dog this thing until I've learned enough
to suit me. Since I'm an old dog, slowly dogging means it'll take some time.

I did learn that the "pagewide" MFPs do not (at least so far) require
the driver plugin. I found them listed under "other" in the supported
devices database, so I didn't notice them at first.

I am not at all familiar with this technology. As I understand it, those
things use a page-wide stationary printer head with over 40,000 nozzles
to put pigment and dye on the paper. I think they said the print engine
has no moving parts. Only the paper moves. One presumes they're not
counting the parts the user has to REmove and REplace to keep them working.

8-)	

The pagewide versions of the 477 series cost more than the laser
versions, by quite a margin. But, if I can convince myself that the
technology will be reliable and not terribly expensive to support, I
might give it a shot.

>> It still would seem to beg the question as to why the system would be
>> designed this way. But I'm not a printer hardware designer, and I don't know
>> what requirements are placed on those guys by the production and delivery
>> schedules. Maybe it's just a workaround to help HP get the most up-to-date
>> stuff out the door in the most timely manner possible.
>
> Dunno. It could be as simple as HP licensing software from elsewhere
> for printing and scanning and not having the rights to open source it.
>>From their point of view re-inventing the wheel doesn't make sense.
>
> For me, I'd take an HP laser multifunctional because I would want the
> copying facility. For you. you may have to widen your search to other
> vendors to get separate printing and scanning devices.
>
> It depends, also, on how pragmatic a user is. HP could be seen as a
> responsive, trustworthy and reliable company. The fact is that most
> printer manufacturers have some element of non-free software as part
> of their modern offerings at the inexpensive end of their product
> line.
>

Yes. I was just a little appalled that my own lack of acumen wrt this
driver model was about to have me putting something I didn't really want 
on my system.

At least HP has done a good job of providing a reliable
one-stop-shopping process for Linux users who need printing support.
Having the hplip package right there in the repository certainly makes
life simpler for a lot of folks.

>> At any rate, I can probably fulfill my requirements my buying a little more
>> hardware than I had originally intended. And I appreciate the efforts you
>> and Henrique have made on my behalf.
>>
>> If I should learn anything interesting from HP tech support I'll try to come
>> back with it.
>
> Considering HP say they do not offer Linux support directly, you are
> doing well.
>

Can't complain! I didn't talk with them until Friday, so don't expect to 
hear back until Monday. The tech I spoke with already made some
suggestions as to directions we might try. He certainly indicated a
willingness to work with me to find what I need. He had me send him a
list of distributions and software packages I intend to use so that he
could determine what driver support level I need.

I was impressed.

Thank you again for your help.

JP

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#174943

On 11/20/2016 02:52 PM, Brian wrote:
> On Sat 19 Nov 2016 at 16:38:20 -0500, Jape Person wrote:
>
>> On 11/19/2016 03:09 PM, Brian wrote:
>>>
>>> Sorry to be awkward, but what does "it's" refer to?
>>>
>>
>> Uh, I'm the awkward one here. That's why I'm asking for help.
>
> Not at all. I've learned a thing or two from this thread. For example,
> I hadn't appreciated the extent to which the laserjet multifunction
> devices were dependent on the plugin, whereas the MFP inkjets are not
> (for now).
>

Yes, I believe I saw statements on the hp site indicating that they 
intend to start supporting more and more devices, including new inkjet 
MFPs, with the driver-plugin model.

>>> The plugin contains *.fw files and libraries. A firmware file is uploaded to
>>> the printer when it is switched on. Quite what the libraries do I do not
>>> know but my assumption is they are involved in this and the host-based
>>> management of the printer. Enlightenment would be appreciated.
>>>
>>
>> Let's not start with unreasonable expectations. The likelihood that I will
>> enlighten you in such a matter is vanishingly small.
>
> Others are reading this thread too. :)
>
>> I didn't find any information this specific about the driver plugin. If you
>> can steer me toward the relevant information I would appreciate it. I read
>> information at all the links that seemed as though they could be pertinent
>> from the hplipopensource.com location.
>
> The plugin can be downloaded from openprinting.org and its contents
> examined. Or install it with hp-plugin and look at /usr/share/hplip
> to see what you get. Delete the files by hand afterwards. Firmware
> appears to be only for a few specific printers and it is the faxing,
> scanning and printing libraries which are used for the majority (or
> perhaps all) of multifunctionals. Closed source; we cannot tell.
>

I'll look at that. I had ASSumed that there was a different 
driver-plugin for each different model, so didn't even look at the 
direct download option.

>> So, are you saying that nothing within that driver plugin gets invoked by or
>> interacts with the host system? It's just some firmware that gets copied to
>> the printer and some libraries which reside on the host and which interact
>> with the printer. If that's the case, then my concern about the driver
>> plugin is a tempest in a teapot.
>
> No, I am not saying that. I think hplip looks for and interacts with
> the libraries if they are needed for a particular device. Last time I
> set up a print queue (without having the printer) for a device which
> needed a plugin, CUPS relayed an error message from the hpcups driver.
> It is something I need to look into when I have the time.
>
> I'd stick with your original concern.
>

Yup. I'm going to just slowly dog this thing until I've learned enough 
to suit me. Since I'm an old dog, slowly dogging means it'll take some time.

I did learn that the "pagewide" MFPs do not (at least so far) require 
the driver plugin. I found them listed under "other" in the supported 
devices database, so I didn't notice them at first.

I am not at all familiar with this technology. As I understand it, those 
things use a page-wide stationary printer head with over 40,000 nozzles 
to put pigment and dye on the paper. I think they said the print engine 
has no moving parts. Only the paper moves. One presumes they're not 
counting the parts the user has to REmove and REplace to keep them working.

8-)

The pagewide versions of the 477 series cost more than the laser 
versions, by quite a margin. But, if I can convince myself that the 
technology will be reliable and not terribly expensive to support, I 
might give it a shot.

>> It still would seem to beg the question as to why the system would be
>> designed this way. But I'm not a printer hardware designer, and I don't know
>> what requirements are placed on those guys by the production and delivery
>> schedules. Maybe it's just a workaround to help HP get the most up-to-date
>> stuff out the door in the most timely manner possible.
>
> Dunno. It could be as simple as HP licensing software from elsewhere
> for printing and scanning and not having the rights to open source it.
> From their point of view re-inventing the wheel doesn't make sense.
>
> For me, I'd take an HP laser multifunctional because I would want the
> copying facility. For you. you may have to widen your search to other
> vendors to get separate printing and scanning devices.
>
> It depends, also, on how pragmatic a user is. HP could be seen as a
> responsive, trustworthy and reliable company. The fact is that most
> printer manufacturers have some element of non-free software as part
> of their modern offerings at the inexpensive end of their product
> line.
>

Yes. I was just a little appalled that my own lack of acumen wrt this 
driver model was about to have me putting something I didn't really want 
on my system.

At least HP has done a good job of providing a reliable 
one-stop-shopping process for Linux users who need printing support. 
Having the hplip package right there in the repository certainly makes 
life simpler for a lot of folks.

>> At any rate, I can probably fulfill my requirements my buying a little more
>> hardware than I had originally intended. And I appreciate the efforts you
>> and Henrique have made on my behalf.
>>
>> If I should learn anything interesting from HP tech support I'll try to come
>> back with it.
>
> Considering HP say they do not offer Linux support directly, you are
> doing well.
>
Can't complain! I didn't talk with them until Friday, so don't expect to 
hear back until Monday. The tech I spoke with already made some 
suggestions as to directions we might try. He certainly indicated a 
willingness to work with me to find what I need. He had me send him a 
list of distributions and software packages I intend to use so that he 
could determine what driver support level I need.

I was impressed.

Thank you again for your help.

JP

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#175020

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 21/11/16 08:52, Brian wrote:
> Considering HP say they do not offer Linux support directly, you are
> doing well.

Comments like this (those from HP and other vendors, not this one from
Brian) bug me.

I don't want HP to support Linux; I want printers to use open, published
(by them or anyone else) protocols that _any_ OS provider can choose to
support. Not that there's anything wrong with them providing hplip or
whatever _as_well_.

Richard

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#175021

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 12:21:21AM +1300, Richard Hector wrote:
> On 21/11/16 08:52, Brian wrote:
> > Considering HP say they do not offer Linux support directly, you are
> > doing well.
> 
> Comments like this (those from HP and other vendors, not this one from
> Brian) bug me.
> 
> I don't want HP to support Linux; I want printers to use open, published
> (by them or anyone else) protocols that _any_ OS provider can choose to
> support. Not that there's anything wrong with them providing hplip or
> whatever _as_well_.

Very much this. Put in other terms: *I don't want HP to actively sabotage
free software/open systems*

Phew. Had to be said.

thanks :-)
- -- tomás
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlg1hIkACgkQBcgs9XrR2kaCaACfQy2vBB8abaTDndehKxx0fvBh
gY4An2Q6B0Mf75pWTDdZhhSSUb8N6Yrm
=2zf5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#175027

On Wednesday 23 November 2016 06:59:05 tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 12:21:21AM +1300, Richard Hector wrote:
> > On 21/11/16 08:52, Brian wrote:
> > > Considering HP say they do not offer Linux support directly, you
> > > are doing well.
> >
> > Comments like this (those from HP and other vendors, not this one
> > from Brian) bug me.
> >
> > I don't want HP to support Linux; I want printers to use open,
> > published (by them or anyone else) protocols that _any_ OS provider
> > can choose to support. Not that there's anything wrong with them
> > providing hplip or whatever _as_well_.
>
> Very much this. Put in other terms: *I don't want HP to actively
> sabotage free software/open systems*
>
> Phew. Had to be said.

Something that needs to be repeated often enough they can hear it in the 
board rooms.  There are 3 main brands of printers that when I am in the 
market, I walk right past their shelf space and go look at another 
brand, purely because of their avowed, you are using linux, so we will 
not warranty any failures, or that go to extreme lengths to protect 
their aftermarket ink or toner sales while selling the same cartridge 
for several different printers at prices dependent of the original cost 
of the printer but the price varies by a 5/1 ratio. Most of the profit 
in selling the printer, is in the replacement of its expendables, so 
much so that they can sell the printer for $19.99.  Thats cool, until 
the ink runs out, and the replacement cartridge is over $100.  That 
brand of user capture has never felt right to this old man. In my house, 
a name brand lives or dies by the quality of printout and its cost per 
printed page.
>
> thanks :-)
> -- tomás


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 <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#175045

On Wed 23 Nov 2016 at 12:59:05 +0100, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 12:21:21AM +1300, Richard Hector wrote:
> > On 21/11/16 08:52, Brian wrote:
> > > Considering HP say they do not offer Linux support directly, you are
> > > doing well.
> > 
> > Comments like this (those from HP and other vendors, not this one from
> > Brian) bug me.
> > 
> > I don't want HP to support Linux; I want printers to use open, published
> > (by them or anyone else) protocols that _any_ OS provider can choose to
> > support. Not that there's anything wrong with them providing hplip or
> > whatever _as_well_.
> 
> Very much this. Put in other terms: *I don't want HP to actively sabotage
> free software/open systems*
> 
> Phew. Had to be said.

Both sentiments are noble but the reality is that many LaserJet MFPs
need a plugin for printing. If they don't they will probably require
one for scanning. HP sell printers, not Linux printers, and at least
provide the plugin software. I think if I was intending to purchase
fifty such printers for my company for use with my Debian systems the
source code for a plugin being available might be a bonus, but its
lack would not be a blocker.

If there was worry about the affect of the offending libraries on the
rest of the system wouldn't sandboxing (about which I know nothing)
be a possible solution?

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#175047

On Sat 19 Nov 2016 at 20:09:10 +0000, Brian wrote:

> On Sat 19 Nov 2016 at 13:21:23 -0500, Jape Person wrote:
> 
> > On 11/19/2016 11:31 AM, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > >On Sat, 19 Nov 2016, Brian wrote:
> > >>>I'd like to know that, too.  I need a new home color printer, my
> > >>>10-year-old HP PhotoSmart (blobless) MFP has finally broken down and
> > >>>good second-hand parts are not easy to find in Brazil :-(
> > >>
> > >>Why is it important for the printer to be blobless? Look at it this way:
> > >
> > >Are we talking about printer firmware, or host-cpu device drivers?
> > >
> > >All of your reply is only relevant for device firmware (runs in the
> > >device).  But I thought this was about a binary-only driver blob that
> > >runs in the host OS ?  Or did I misunderstand?
> > >
> > I'm pretty sure it's a host-cpu device driver.
> > 
> > http://hplipopensource.com/node/309
> 
> Sorry to be awkward, but what does "it's" refer to?
> 
> The plugin contains *.fw files and libraries. A firmware file is uploaded to
> the printer when it is switched on. Quite what the libraries do I do not
> know but my assumption is they are involved in this and the host-based
> management of the printer. Enlightenment would be appreciated.

Enlightenment came from thinking about it. :) I concentrated too much
on the firmware aspect. I suspect firmware may only be needed with older
printers. Maybe the newer printers have a Host Based Printer Language
Interpreter.

Henrique de Moraes Holschuh and you are correct. If the printing side of
the MFP requires the plugin it is a host-based printer and the hbpl1
library would be used. Sorry for the misleading up a blind alley.

Even if a colour laserjet MFP can get by for printing without the plugin
it probably requires it for scanning.

  http://hplipopensource.com/hplip-web/plugin.html

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#174888

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Sat, Nov 19, 2016 at 03:55:52PM +0000, Brian wrote:

[...]

> Why is it important for the printer to be blobless? Look at it this way:

Horses for courses :-)

If the printer wants to be bought by me, being blobless would greatly
improve its chances. I understand that this property has different
weight to different people.

regards
- -- t
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlgwhhEACgkQBcgs9XrR2kYNlgCfVsnjQp2HOLhm+wGFT7MTD+Po
LzsAniaGknoB34p5nZVrMt6regKY6XLM
=Txg2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#174890

On Sat 19 Nov 2016 at 18:04:17 +0100, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:

> On Sat, Nov 19, 2016 at 03:55:52PM +0000, Brian wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
> > Why is it important for the printer to be blobless? Look at it this way:
> 
> Horses for courses :-)
> 
> If the printer wants to be bought by me, being blobless would greatly
> improve its chances. I understand that this property has different
> weight to different people.

The argument you snipped was an integral part of the bit you kept. If
the answer to the first sentence is - "I like it that way", then further
exploration of the idea is stunted. :)

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web