> > >
> > > On the other hand, a squeaky front end to ghostscript'd do
> the job nicely,
> > > I'd think.
> > >
> > > -rj
>
> Does ghostscript run on any printers?  Or is this just another way of
> generating a bitmap to send to the laser printer.
>
>

What I meant was that since ghostscript's capable of running a number of
printers (pretty much everything except the piece of crap winwriters which
don't even work correctly on NT) we could leverage it by having a squeak vm
running on a PC and driving ghostscript.  That particular squeak image (the
driver)'d probably end up feeding gs something resembling Postscript, but
that's really a detail.  I'd envision it processing a PrintableObject passed
over a wire from other squeak images.

My point is that effectively controlling printers is a tough job which
ghostscript's been tackling for last oh.. 10 years?  I'd think that
reinventing that particular wheel'd be something to avoid.

-rj