Talk:CUPS/Printer-specific problems

From ArchWiki
< Talk:CUPS
Revision as of 19:53, 11 November 2015 by Aerion (talk | contribs)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Merging issues

Accuracy flag

I was the author of the Canon CAPT page.

While the CAPT installation procedure is indeed non-standard, this is the only way I have managed to successfully install a Canon LBP2900 via USB, and a Canon LBP6310dn via ethernet on both Arch Linux and Linux Mint on three separate computers. This prompted me to document the steps in the Wiki, after adapting them to Arch Linux from the original, linked, Ubuntu article.

Furthermore, adding a printer to CUPS using lpadmin is a perfectly valid method.

Did the person who questions the instructions even attempt to install a CAPT printer himself, before disputing the factual accuracy?

Canon's own installation instructions use this method, rather than a standard installation procedure using the CUPS web interface. , although they don't work due to the port number being incorrect. (Upon reinspection, the port number used in this wiki matches the one in the Canon installation manual. The possible issue with the port number being wrong appears to be Ubuntu specific).

While CAPT printers are detected by, and can be added via the CUPS GUI, they do not work.

Removing the Accuracy Dispute notification. -- Aerion (talk) 12:59, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! I don't have access to a Canon printer, so I just "dumped" the contents of Canon_CAPT, see [1], and then it was cleaned up by Lonaowna [2].
I picked the accuracy template as I was unsure as to why the instructions were so different, but I was unable to verify them myself; it was not meant as a slur of any kind against the original page. I'm glad that someone could verify that the instructions worked as intended! -- Pypi (talk) 18:29, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
Pypi, thanks for pointing out the revisions. I should have looked more closely (essentially, I didn't know I could look up who made which edits) and have asked you directly if you had any particular reason for your questioning of the accuracy. Apologies! -- Aerion (talk) 12:05, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
The accuracy template was placed correctly. When you claim the regular way isn't working, you file a bug report or refer to upstream resources when they explain why exactly something doesn't work. That way users can keep track of changes and can be made sure it's not a PEBKAC issue. -- Alad (talk) 19:42, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
I fail to understand here why the factual accuracy is disputed. The information is factual (I performed the installation steps myself, rather than merely copying instructions for a printer I don't own myself, and they are based on Canon's own installation guide) as well as accurate (after performing the steps you end up with a working printer as confirmed by myself, on three separate systems). I don't understand the need to file an upstream bug report when Canon's own installation manual does not provide a CUPS web interface method. There is no bug here, as Canon's official installation instructions clearly work.
Is there a policy for Arch Linux that I'm not aware of that stipulates that all printers must be installable via the CUPS GUI? I thought that Arch is a techie distro that doesn't shy away from command line instructions. lpadmin is a perfectly valid method to install/manage printers, so if this printer requires installation via the command line, surely a wiki page with instruction on how to do so is all that's needed?
I thought the whole point of the Arch wiki is to provide other users with information so that they don't have to struggle to get something working, and since this printer requires 'special' instructions, I feel this section is valid, relevant, warranted and accurate -- Aerion (talk) 12:05, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
Your lengthy argument doesn't change the fact that given functionality is, supposedly, broken.To repeat myself: "When you claim the regular way isn't working, you file a bug report or refer to upstream resources when they explain why exactly something doesn't work. That way users can keep track of changes and can be made sure it's not a PEBKAC issue." -- Alad (talk) 22:24, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
I read and understood you the first time. But despite your repeated message I still don't see the need to raise a bug report for something that works perfectly as per Canon's own installation manual. I also still don't understand why the factual accuracy is disputed, as the instructions in this wiki have been tried and tested and leave the user with a correctly functioning printer. The accuracy flag misleadingly implies that the instructions given don't work, and that is factually inaccurate. Your patronising tone and attitude do not encourage people to try and help to contribute to this wiki.
If you define "attitude" as "getting to the bottom of things", yes, then I have a terrible attitude. Found a post which explains things a bit better, not perfect, but it should do for now. [3] -- Alad (talk) 18:51, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
Getting to the bottom of things is fine, I've got no issue with that. I do have issues when someone is patronising, and your repeating of your previous post was exactly that. The same goes for the 'this is not up for discussion' tone of your response to the (attempt at a) discussion regarding the page title below, with a blunt 'Closing this branch' to stifle the discussion before it had even started. I certainly don't feel compelled to attempt to contribute to the Arch wiki in the future, or to any discussion in the Talk pages, if this is the attitude of the Arch Linux upper echelon towards lower ranking members.
Maybe you're right, and CAPT printers should be installable via the CUPS web. The point is, Canon's own instructions do not cater for a GUI installation, and their command line method works. Had they provided instructions for both a GUI method and a command line method, and the GUI one failed whereas the command line one doesn't, then I could understand the need for an upstream bug report. Since this is not the case, at best you could argue for a bug report asking Canon to provide a GUI installation method. Given Canon's attitude towards Linux, however, I doubt such a report would get very far; especially when their own instructions work. I tried the GUI method at first, like I would with any other printer, found it didn't work, then did some research, found the command line method in both the Canon manual and the Ubuntu wiki, adapted them to Arch and lo and behold: I had a working printer. That's all a wiki page needs to provide: working instructions that help others, and that's exactly what I created.
Rather than disputing the factual accuracy, and arrogantly reinstating the unwarranted Accuracy template, you could instead have added the note that is on there now straight away. That note is perfectly acceptable, as it no longer incorrectly implies that the manual method doesn't work. Ideally it should state something like "Installing CAPT printers via the web interface may not work. [1] Instead, use the manual method described below, based on Canon's installation manual", to make clear that it's not some random manual method that happens to work. (FYI: the adaptations are essentially the change from RPM downloads to an AUR provided package, and catering for a Systemd based system). I shall, however, leave that up to you or others, for I'll refrain from modifying this, or any other pages, as clearly there is an Arch Wiki police force that doesn't tolerate any dissent. And for the record, I have no problems with my text getting edited or even deleted if it is outright wrong. I also fully understand that no one owns any (copy)right(s) to contributions made, and that they can get modified at any point, for any reason. It's the way you went about it, and for the wrong reasons. -- Aerion (talk) 18:38, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
You're welcome to change the note, more so if it means including a link to the Canon manual. As to the rest, see Forum_etiquette#Ineffective_discussion_.28.22bikeshed.22.29. I'd recommend you to stop making wild accusations and flinging insults like you're doing right now. -- Alad (talk) 19:03, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
edit: I've moved #Page title to Talk:CUPS. Feel free to continue the discussion there, as long as you consider existing efforts made. -- Alad (talk) 19:10, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
I'll see if I can find a linkable online copy of the manual, or ideally the installation page itself. Until now I've only consulted the offline manual which is included with the driver download.
As for insults or wild accusations, I've made neither. You are clearly in an authoritative position when it comes to Arch Wiki contributions, hence upper echelon. Your blunt stifling of the discussion, as well as the instant reinstatement of the Accuracy template, whilst not listening to my arguments most certainly made me feel like opposing views are not tolerated. Your tone was patronising. All of that is avoidable by a less abrasive stance, as that never fosters a strong community spirit. Having said that, by replacing the Accuracy template with the sensible note, and inviting me to the discussion on the CUPS page, you've done the opposite, so thank you.
Interestingly, the Ubuntu article you found may have an explanation for Canon only providing a manual installation method. From the 'Problems' section: "Canon use their own proprietary software and protocol for talking to the printer, which is why it is not integrated with cups, does not get automatically detected, and requires a driver to be manually installed. It is reasonable to expect that a printer should be automatically detected and just work, but this is not possible with Canon LBP." If it is of any interest, I'm happy to attempt another install of the LBP6310dn using the GUI approach, to see exactly why it doesn't work. It may be a good few weeks before I get the chance to do so as the printer is in a location I only visit every so often, and only if this would further anything; let me know. -- Aerion (talk) 19:52, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Web interface

Aerion, have you filed a bug report/figured out why adding it via the web interface didn't work? I'm more curious than anything else; I can't test your method here. -- Pypi (talk) 03:45, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Pypi, I can't remember what exactly doesn't work when you try to add the printer via the web interface; it's been more than a year since I set them up. I think the printer URI protocol is completely wrong (should be ccp:// but it ends up as something else) but I could be wrong on that. One of the printers I don't have access to (it's at my sister's who lives abroad), and the other one (the very LBP6310dn I used in the instructions here, running on Arch Linux) is at a charity where I volunteer as an IT admin once or twice a month. When I get some time I could try and see what exactly happens when adding this printer via the web interface.
Since these printers are more complicated to get to work than your average Gutenprint or Foomatic supported printers due to their proprietary Canon Printer Daemon for CUPS (ccpd), I decided to add the instructions to the Arch wiki for the benefit of others. I didn't see any need to file a bug report as the instructions from Canon's own installation manual work. Furthermore, since Canon themselves don't provide a CUPS GUI installation method, I don't see a need to file a bug report for the GUI approach not working. Aerion (talk) 12:05, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Page title

Moved to Talk:CUPS#Printer-specific problems. -- Alad (talk) 19:09, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Remote forwarding

I'm not clear on why this newly added section is required. How is the process different from that outlined on Secure_Shell#X11_forwarding? As mentioned, there are several ways of doing this - I don't think that there is enough in here, as I understand it, to outweigh the maintenance cost of duplication. Could Aerion clarify as to why this is required? -- Pypi (talk) 03:48, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

I've tried to edit that section now ([4] and [5]), however I'm not convinced that it is an improvement. The old way had some advantages - it was clearer, for a start - and the "new" way seems even more redundant. For instance, adding the autostart section as a "tip" seems OK, but it makes me think that it is largely redundant. Was it better as a tutorial? There would be a fair bit of research required to duplicate Aerion's findings, so it could be argued that the duplication was fairly minimal. Also, how well would that section age? Thoughts? Feel free to revert the main edits if I didn't do a very good job. -- Pypi (talk) 03:42, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
Before simply reverting your edits, let's indeed discuss it here first. We could leave out the remote CUPS monitoring section out entirely, and leave it up to people to work it out for themselves how to get monitoring of a remote CAPT printer working. But this, to me, defeats the whole purpose of a wiki, which is to provide others with instructions on how to do something that you've figured out yourself.
We could also a single line like "Use SSH and X11forwarding to use the printer monitor on a remote CUPS server", but again to me this defeats the purpose of a wiki. If you've already worked it out yourself, why let other people struggle to figure it for themselves?
I work on the basis that if I had found these instructions, I would find them very useful, and would be grateful for someone else having gone trough the effort of documenting the steps, and for even having come up with this particular solution to a shortcoming in Canon's software.
Canon's support for Linux is less than forthcoming, so when I got told that what I needed wasn't supported, I tried to find a solution to my problem. I don't think it is exactly a fringe case, to have a working printer monitor for a printer that runs on a central, headless CUPS server. Canon's approach would mean having to install the printer as a local printer on each of the desktops, with a locally running print monitor, but this defeats the object of running a central print server where all users are allowed to cancel stuck print jobs that hold up everybody else (a common occurrence in that office). The desktops are configured with cups-browsed so as to avoid having to install each printer locally, and that works beautifully (except on bloody Macs, oh the irony).
Now as for your edits, having the autostart info as a tip breaks the tutorial, as autostarting of the script is essential for the printer monitor to work.
I can't see the information ageing, unless there are dramatic changes to the way X11forwarding works.
I do see your concern about the risk of duplication of information, however, I feel that in this case it is relevant as part of a tutorial on how to get something specific to this printer working. -- Aerion (talk) 12:08, 9 November 2015 (UTC)