Noel Torres <envite@???> writes:
> Just curious...
>
> Why not using CUPS ?
>
> I've been using it since times' night with no issues.

For me, the answer is that I see no benefit in getting accustomed with
something as complicated (looking) as CUPS for as long as I don't want
more than to run some input file through a pipeline of filters (nowadays
provided by the printer vendor) and then send it to some output device.

Judging from the (incomplete) information Hendrik Boom posted, he
originally used

lp=515@172.25.1.122

515 is the lpd printer port. Trying to print to a printer defined in
this way ought to result in an "invalid services" message (or something
like that) as the abstract syntax of this entry (for a network printer)
is

<printer name>@<host>[%<port>]
(the port is optional and defaults to 515)

By the time he posted this for the first time, I suggested using
something like

lpq -Pall@<host>

(or an equivalent lpc command). A later mail he sent showed the lp entry
as

lp=POSTSCRIPT_P1@172.25.1.15

this is correct for accessing the 'PostScript queue' on a Brother
network printer (which supports PostScript). The Brother printer driver
(aka 'input filter') should take care of the rest. This works for me and
(reportedly) also for him.

NB: I don't claim there is no Evil Black Magic[tm] going on here, just
that I haven't ever encountered any.