| Re: PHP: convert a page to pdf [OT] [message #180959 is a reply to message #180957] |
Thu, 28 March 2013 21:38   |
adrian
Messages: 27
Registered: December 2012
Karma:
|
Junior Member |
|
|
The Natural Philosopher <tnp(at)invalid(dot)invalid> wrote:
> On 28/03/13 19:14, Adrian Tuddenham wrote:
>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp(at)invalid(dot)invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On 28/03/13 17:32, Adrian Tuddenham wrote:
>>>> Michael Vilain <vilain(at)NOspamcop(dot)net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > In article <a2b28350-6f57-43bc-935e-66a179409287(at)googlegroups(dot)com>,
>>>> > badmus aliu <bajab247(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> can anyone help me on how to convert a database driven page to pdf
>>>> > using php
>>>> >
>>>> > On MacOS, just print the generated page and save to PDF.
>>>>
>>>> I think this only works with OSX. In the earlier MacOSs (OS 6 to OS9),
>>>> the print command will allow you to Save to file. This gives a
>>>> PostScript document which you can then convert to PDF with Distiller.
>>>>
>>>
>>> works just fine here on linux. Print to file defaults to a pdf, on Firefox.
>>
>> I don't understand the relevance of this reply. Neither Linux nor
>> Firefox can run under MacOS.
>>
>
> I don't undestand the relevance of this comment
>
> 1/. Firefox can run under MacOSX
> 2/. so can linux in a virtual machine
> 3/, "I think this only works with OSX."
>
>>>
>>>> Some MacOS applications such as PageMaker 6.5 have an option to export
>>>> as a PDF; but it isn't really a direct conversion, it still goes through
>>>> the PostScript- Distiller route.
>>>>
>>>
>>> shows how backward OSX is..
>>
>> Again, I cannot see a connection betwen your reply and the preceding
>> comment, because PageMaker 6.5 is not an OSX application.
>>
> s/OSX/OS
>>>>
>>>
>>> However that's not what the OP wants. he doesn't want to involve the
>>> users browser.
>>>
>>> he wants to generate a pdf an the server. Or why else would he ask in a
>>> PHP newsgroup?
>>
>> I fully appreciate that; but I felt it was necessary to correct any
>> possible confusion between the behaviour of Mac OS and of OSX, which
>> could have misled others who read this group.
>>
>
> I doubt anyone but you even remembers what OS9 or earlier is, or does
> Even our PowerPcs here have at least OSX on them. I cant imagine anyone
> still runs it natively.
The post to which I replied said "MacOS", not "Mac OSX". To avoid any
confusion I made the distinction between the two. From your comments
about Firefox it appears that you regard OSX as the only Mac operating
system and have fallen into the very trap I was trying to steer people
away from.
Mac OS 8 and 9 are still perfectly adequate for non-entertainment work
and have many good features which were thrown away when Mac introduced
OSX. And yes, I do run it natively on all but one of my machines.
--
~ Adrian Tuddenham ~
(Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
www.poppyrecords.co.uk
|
|
|
|
Calendar
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
]