Talk:Canon CAPT

From ArchWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Comments on configuration

Awaiting for feedback on the following:

  1. highlighting the different steps (CUPS, CAPT and then service) into sub-sections instead of one block. Note the Gentoo page uses the same wording and shares the same notes and examples but has a clearer organisation.
  2. reminder about how to find the lp* could be useful
  3. clarifications about the port to use: after investigation the port to use should be the UI_Port 59787, there is no need to reference 59687 which is the data port in the current setup. 59687 may have been the port in past versions or in some distros but mentioning it is rather confusing.
  4. using the full path of the PPD prevents from finding the file, should we remind it
  5. the AUR captdriver-git is alpha and dormant is it worth mentioning it exists
  6. I don't think the web interface can install the driver properly shouldn't we be clearer about this as an initial warning instead of a Note

Kewl (talk) 10:22, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

I'm not convinced that splitting the different steps into subsections improves the flow of the article. However, I would be keen in instead using the article to list necessary changes to the flow of the main article, eg mention the URI format and link to CUPS#Printer URI, and remove the comments about using finding the right PPD and instead let users use lpinfo -m (if that is sufficiently clear!).
I don't think a reminder about how to find the lp device to use is useful (that should be obvious, right?).
Could you expand on why the UI_Port will always be 59787? If you are "certain" that that will always be the case, then the note could be removed (it must have worked at one point!).
I've expanded one of the notes to mention that the full path of the PPD does not work ([1]).
The captdriver-gitAUR package is definitely worth mentioning - perhaps someone might discover it and decide to maintain it!
I'm unclear on why the web interface does not install the driver properly (it works the same way as lpadmin!). If it is just that it doesn't set up the cppdadmin service, then the note could be removed entirely if the page is refactored to just point at CUPS. If there is a bug of some kind in the web interface, then I would agree that it should be a warning, otherwise I think a note suffices since anyone reading the page will probably follow along anyway.
-- Pypi (talk) 07:13, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
I've made a quick draft over at User:Pypi/Canon CAPT to illustrate the linking to the main article concept (although the PPD reference is still there). Comments would be welcome :D -- Pypi (talk) 07:41, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
I am fine with your new draft, I think it is clearer, then I am curious to understand why the web interface did not work for me. It was not printing anything and it seems to be a common issue when using the web interface from the different forums I looked at.
-- Kewl (talk) 08:10, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
You could set up a new printer using the web interface and compare the printer configurations (in /etc/cups/printers.conf) to see what is different.
Is the output of lpinfo -m sufficiently clear that the PPD references could be removed, or do they need to stay in for now? And could you please clarify why UI_Port will always be 59787?
I think after the above points have been clarified the page will be ready for merging.
-- Pypi (talk) 07:10, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
I won't be able to prove the UI_Port will always be 59787, in the PPDs I looked at this was the port used but it is possible that in the past of for other printers other ports were used. Kewl (talk) 09:12, 12 October 2017 (UTC)