[okular] [Bug 398442] okular doesn't respect page reverse setting of PPD or lpadmin

[Frederick Eaton]

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=398442

--- Comment #7 from Frederick Eaton <frederik at ofb.net> ---
> Can you confirm it's also working as you'd expect when you use the "Force rasterization" option in the print dialog?

Yes.

Some observations:

- What does "force rasterization" mean? It's not really self-explanatory. Does
anyone use it?

- If I check an "Options >>" option in the print dialog, the next time I open
the dialog it is unchecked. Which is fine because usually I'm selecting a page
range or number of copies or something that I want to only do for one document.
As a user I would expect the "Reverse" setting in this place to apply to just
one document as well, not to the printer in general. In other words it should
produce a document whose pages are backwards when I take it out of the printer
and try to staple them. To accomplish this, you wouldn't override the
"output-order" setting of CUPS. Rather you would modulate it, as in
exclusive-OR: "print dialog options = reverse" + "default output order =
reverse" -> "setting for this job = normal".

But I think that CUPS should be doing that automatically, even when the output
order setting is specified on the command line, it should modulate and not
override. I don't see the utility of allowing client applications to override
printer-specific details like this, it breaks the abstraction layer that CUPS
is supposed to provide. Why should Okular need to know whether my printer
prints face-up or face-down? Why should it *get* to know?

Unfortunately I was not able to communicate this to the CUPS maintainer before
he closed my bug as "too heated". YMMV.

You may want to look at how other KDE applications do printing, I seem to
recall finding one which did not have this problem, but I can't remember for
sure and I didn't find it when looking over the various bug reports I made. Or
you could look at Evince and other GTK applications.

It would probably be useful if you were able to reproduce this yourself. I have
provided instructions for how to do that without a printer, did you run into
problems following them?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.