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

Groups > linux.debian.user > #184617 > unrolled thread

pesky and persistent "driverless" Brother MFC-9340CDW

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

Contents

  pesky and persistent "driverless" Brother MFC-9340CDW Jape Person <japers@comcast.net> - 2017-08-04 04:00 +0200
    Re: pesky and persistent "driverless" Brother MFC-9340CDW Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2017-08-04 12:40 +0200
      Re: pesky and persistent "driverless" Brother MFC-9340CDW Jape Person <japers@comcast.net> - 2017-08-04 20:20 +0200
        Re: pesky and persistent "driverless" Brother MFC-9340CDW Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2017-08-05 00:50 +0200
          Re: pesky and persistent "driverless" Brother MFC-9340CDW Jape Person <japers@comcast.net> - 2017-08-05 02:30 +0200
            Re: pesky and persistent "driverless" Brother MFC-9340CDW Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2017-08-05 15:00 +0200
              Re: pesky and persistent "driverless" Brother MFC-9340CDW Jape Person <japers@comcast.net> - 2017-08-05 17:50 +0200
              Re: pesky and persistent "driverless" Brother MFC-9340CDW Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2017-08-05 18:50 +0200
                Re: pesky and persistent "driverless" Brother MFC-9340CDW Jape Person <japers@comcast.net> - 2017-08-05 19:20 +0200
                  Re: pesky and persistent "driverless" Brother MFC-9340CDW Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2017-08-05 20:30 +0200
                    Re: pesky and persistent "driverless" Brother MFC-9340CDW Jape Person <japers@comcast.net> - 2017-08-05 20:50 +0200
                      Re: pesky and persistent "driverless" Brother MFC-9340CDW Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2017-08-05 21:20 +0200
                        Re: pesky and persistent "driverless" Brother MFC-9340CDW Jape Person <japers@comcast.net> - 2017-08-06 00:50 +0200
    Re: pesky and persistent "driverless" Brother MFC-9340CDW Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2017-08-04 14:30 +0200
      Re: pesky and persistent "driverless" Brother MFC-9340CDW Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2017-08-04 15:00 +0200
        Re: pesky and persistent "driverless" Brother MFC-9340CDW Jape Person <japers@comcast.net> - 2017-08-04 20:30 +0200
        Re: pesky and persistent "driverless" Brother MFC-9340CDW Jape Person <japers@comcast.net> - 2017-08-04 22:20 +0200
          Re: pesky and persistent "driverless" Brother MFC-9340CDW Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2017-08-05 01:10 +0200
            Re: pesky and persistent "driverless" Brother MFC-9340CDW Jape Person <japers@comcast.net> - 2017-08-05 02:40 +0200
      Re: pesky and persistent "driverless" Brother MFC-9340CDW Jape Person <japers@comcast.net> - 2017-08-04 20:20 +0200
        Re: pesky and persistent "driverless" Brother MFC-9340CDW Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2017-08-05 01:10 +0200
          Re: pesky and persistent "driverless" Brother MFC-9340CDW Jape Person <japers@comcast.net> - 2017-08-05 02:50 +0200
      Re: pesky and persistent "driverless" Brother MFC-9340CDW Jape Person <japers@comcast.net> - 2017-08-04 22:10 +0200
        Re: pesky and persistent "driverless" Brother MFC-9340CDW Richard Hector <richard@walnut.gen.nz> - 2017-08-06 01:40 +0200
          Re: pesky and persistent "driverless" Brother MFC-9340CDW Jape Person <japers@comcast.net> - 2017-08-06 02:10 +0200

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#184650

On Fri 04 Aug 2017 at 14:14:42 -0400, Jape Person wrote:

> On 08/04/2017 08:25 AM, Curt wrote:
> >On 2017-08-04, Jape Person <japers@comcast.net> wrote:
> >>A few weeks ago a CUPS upgrade to our Debian testing systems
> >>started showing a new driver for our Brother MFC-9340CDW in print
> >>dialogs and in the CUPS printer list and in the
> >>system-config-printer utility.
> >>
> >>You'd think that was good news, but we've been unable to find any
> >>way to make the queue for this "driverless" instance of the printer
> >>function properly.
> >>
> >
> >Just very quickly found this bug that seems to be relevant to your
> >case, Jape. As you didn't describe the "garbled" condition of your
> >printouts with the "driverless" driver I can't be sure but it seems a
> >fair guess.
> 
> I should have been more careful in describing the output. Eyes are old, and
> thought the was garbling, but closer exam with magnifying glass reveals that
> it's all just distorted -- as in compressed vertically.

I've met this before in another context with another bug. cups-browsed
is doing its best to give you something better than the printer's default
two lines of output. It cannot be perfect. The suggested workaround for
altering the PPD in #868360 is the way to go. Does it work for you?

-- 
Brian.

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

#184654

On 08/04/2017 07:09 PM, Brian wrote:
> On Fri 04 Aug 2017 at 14:14:42 -0400, Jape Person wrote:
> 
>> On 08/04/2017 08:25 AM, Curt wrote:
>>> On 2017-08-04, Jape Person <japers@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>> A few weeks ago a CUPS upgrade to our Debian testing systems
>>>> started showing a new driver for our Brother MFC-9340CDW in print
>>>> dialogs and in the CUPS printer list and in the
>>>> system-config-printer utility.
>>>>
>>>> You'd think that was good news, but we've been unable to find any
>>>> way to make the queue for this "driverless" instance of the printer
>>>> function properly.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Just very quickly found this bug that seems to be relevant to your
>>> case, Jape. As you didn't describe the "garbled" condition of your
>>> printouts with the "driverless" driver I can't be sure but it seems a
>>> fair guess.
>>
>> I should have been more careful in describing the output. Eyes are old, and
>> thought the was garbling, but closer exam with magnifying glass reveals that
>> it's all just distorted -- as in compressed vertically.
> 
> I've met this before in another context with another bug. cups-browsed
> is doing its best to give you something better than the printer's default
> two lines of output. It cannot be perfect. The suggested workaround for
> altering the PPD in #868360 is the way to go. Does it work for you?
> 

I'm going to hold off on even trying that since I have a working 
solution. I know I should be more curious, but I'm an old cat, and you 
know what they say about that combination!

When I eventually do the firmware upgrade and re-enable detection of the 
driverless queue, I'll edit the PPD if it's still necessary. I saved the 
contents of that message thread for reference.

Again, thanks!

JP

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

#184647

On 08/04/2017 08:25 AM, Curt wrote:
> On 2017-08-04, Jape Person <japers@comcast.net> wrote:
>> A few weeks ago a CUPS upgrade to our Debian testing systems
>> started showing a new driver for our Brother MFC-9340CDW in print
>> dialogs and in the CUPS printer list and in the
>> system-config-printer utility.
>> 
>> You'd think that was good news, but we've been unable to find any
>> way to make the queue for this "driverless" instance of the printer
>> function properly.
>> 
> 
> Just very quickly found this bug that seems to be relevant to your
> case, Jape. As you didn't describe the "garbled" condition of your
> printouts with the "driverless" driver I can't be sure but it seems a
> fair guess.
> 
> Apparently a resolution dpi error (reported as 600x2dpi--firmware 
> bug?--and set that way by cups in the PPD.  Workaroundable by
> modifying the PPD manually as explained in the thread).
> 
> BTW at the Brother site I think they're recommending updating the 
> firmware for this printer (maybe not for the reasons explicited
> here).
> 
> HTH.
> 
> 
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=868360
> 
> 
> 

Thanks, Curt.

It's funny (in much the same way that hitting your thumb with a hammer 
is funny) that the Brother support site does indeed list a later 
firmware update than the one I installed when I first got the printer. 
If one looks at the driver update history at the site, the version 
number jumps from 1.07 to 1.09. I have 1.08.

I purchased a Windows 10 system, trundled the printer from the den to 
the living room to connect to the Windows 10 system via USB cable, and 
updated to a firmware version that is no longer even listed on the 
support site.

And the notes on the 1.09 firmware version update are that it "fixes 
some software bugs". As you implied, they're not exactly explicit about 
the reasons one might have for installing their latest firmware.

I'm going to write them to see if they will provide any worthwhile 
information. If they don't, I'll stick with what I've got and use the 
MFC-9320CW driver -- at least until such time as I have a day when I'm 
only twiddling my thumbs and looking for something to do.

I really appreciate the information you've provided. It really helps put 
the problem in perspective. I think both sides in the thread made good 
points. It's wonderful to have the printer detected and installed 
automatically, but not so wonderful if it doesn't work. The approach 
used by CUPS should have worked. A useful fallback would have been nice. 
But the ball is definitely in Brother's court.

Best regards,
JP

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

#184700

On 05/08/17 07:52, Jape Person wrote:
> It's funny (in much the same way that hitting your thumb with a hammer
> is funny) that the Brother support site does indeed list a later
> firmware update than the one I installed when I first got the printer.
> If one looks at the driver update history at the site, the version
> number jumps from 1.07 to 1.09. I have 1.08.

Perhaps 1.08 was so buggy they decided to withdraw it altogether?

Richard

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

#184703

On 08/05/2017 07:38 PM, Richard Hector wrote:
> On 05/08/17 07:52, Jape Person wrote:
>> It's funny (in much the same way that hitting your thumb with a hammer
>> is funny) that the Brother support site does indeed list a later
>> firmware update than the one I installed when I first got the printer.
>> If one looks at the driver update history at the site, the version
>> number jumps from 1.07 to 1.09. I have 1.08.
> 
> Perhaps 1.08 was so buggy they decided to withdraw it altogether?
> 
> Richard
> 
> 

Yup! That's what I was inferring from their site and implying here. But 
they don't have to allow downloads of a bad firmware version to keep a 
record of its release (and it's "features" and flaws).

That sort of information can be pretty important to a customer. It could 
help me decide whether or not it makes sense to go ahead with an upgrade 
to 1.09. As it is, I don't have even a clue as to whether or not 1.09 is 
meant to fix the resolution misreporting issue -- or anything else that 
might be affecting me.

I only have experience applying one update to the printer. I had to buy 
a Windows computer to accomplish the update, and the update didn't 
provide any improvement whatsoever that I can see in the functionality 
of the printer. It may, in fact, have caused some of the weirdness I've 
seen. I only got it because the Brother site recommended the update to 
improve paper-handling (eliminate smudging and paper wrinkling). 
Paper-handling on this printer has, in my experience, always been excellent.

That doesn't exactly encourage me to proceed with another update. I'm 
spoiled by the changelogs I can see for every package in my Debian 
installations. Most of them are excellent. A few contain very little in 
the way of specific information, except for the fact that they always 
provide version numbers which I can use to find out what's changed from 
upstream.

Heh. I don't want to go through this silly process (mechanically / 
logistically difficult in my little condo) just to go to their site a 
few months from now to see the firmware version number in their update 
history jump from 1.07 to 1.10.

;-)

I'm waiting to see if there's any fallout from people going to 1.09.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

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

csiph-web