"I believe that you are misinterperting my report regarding
the models.dat file ;-)"

I suppose so! :-)

The PSC 780/760/780xi does indeed look buggy.

The BIJ 1000 is probably because the device ID either changed during development (and we wanted all the devices to continue to work), or a user reported a new device ID from the field that was different than what we had in-house (so, they must have changed the device ID between pre-production and production). In either case, we tend to leave both of them in the file just in case, so that devices are more apt to work than not (but, as you point out, this can cause some confusion for documentation).

I will look into the other duplicates and see if I can make sense of any of them.

Thanks,

Don


On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 2:59 AM, Johannes Meixner <jsmeix@suse.de> wrote:
Hello Don,

I believe that you are misinterperting my report regarding
the models.dat file ;-)

I think I know the models.dat file format and I used the
model* keys intentionally to find the duplicates because
what my report actually means is that same model values
can be found under different device types (and the same
model value should also not appear more than once under
one device type).

Using my "uniq -c -d" output you get for example
for the first of the "uniq -c -d" output

[business_inkjet_1000]
model1=Business Inkjet 1000

but also

[hp_business_inkjet_1000]
model1=Business Inkjet 1000

And for the last of the "uniq -c -d" output

[psc_760]
model1=PSC 760

but also

[psc_780]
model1=PSC 760

and also

[psc_780xi]
model1=PSC 760

At least this looks somehow buggy.
Perhaps technically this is all correct (i.e. when HP sells devices
under the same name which are actually different device types)
but I would not understand how a user who has such a device
which is e.g. labeled "PSC 760" should know which of the possible
device types the right one is when all he can select are three
times the same name  "PSC 760"?

--
duplicates in models.dat and hpaio.desc
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/217642
You received this bug notification because you are a member of HP Linux
Imaging and Printing, which is subscribed to HPLIP.