@Obsolesce Step1 was to get the printing working. Now that it is working, I will be investigating as to whether the PCL6 driver works, or the universal drivers. They have with other older HP printers, this particular one didn't. thus the reason I presented the situation to the group. I am appreciative of all responses

Interesting enough, I changed the usb port ( new workstation) from the usb 3 port to the usb 3.1 port, and it started working as expected, (using the pcl5 driver I had installed earlier) Why, I do not know. When I examine further I will update.
Thank you for your comments.

@black3dynamite Yes i did, i installed the pcl5 drivers from their website , the .inf etc.
I didn't look at any of the event logs, ( sigh), I had better do that before I make more submissions.

Having trouble getting an older HP laserjet (4300 series) to work on a recently upgraded win 10 workstation. I have in the recent past, used older drivers ( pcl5) and was worked well. printer connect with centronics to usb cable, and Win 10 does recognize the printer.

Does anybody know of a simple utility to convert .cgm files into something more common, less proprietary ?

@pattonb to get an idea of how many dupes use the following

fdupes -r -m /directory(share to scan)

@DustinB3403 some folks claim jdupes is faster, I have used both, and did not much of a difference.
Both work well.

Is it just me or am I seeing less compliance in the setup of postmaster@fqdn

it does help, any solutions for samba file servers, and WSD ?

is it prudent to use cidr notation for an include record in a SPF record, or is a fqdn acceptable ? or both ?

@JaredBusch incorrect, Scott has summarized succinctly

@JaredBusch correct, they are tools to determine validity of incoming email. If you have a mail server , ( I would think with a static ip), why you wouldn't have a ptr record that matches your mailserver, is asking for issues.

@JaredBusch SPF has it flaws, however, in this case , ptr check yields 2 fqdn, and no listing in the SPF to confirm validity of sender.

@JaredBusch true, and your point is ?

@scottalanmiller ok, thanks, I am sure it isn't a spammer, it is an email, for me, I was expecting. The sender 'city of calgary"
has their ptr record setup that way.

@pattonb argh the ip IS NOT listed in their spf record, can't type today

@scottalanmiller I have read it. the question is/was, how do you deal with this situation when it occurs (rarely), is there a way other than whitelisting the offending ip for the ptr. and the ip is listed in their spf list.

@JaredBusch the question is more about a ptr record

@dbeato it has been my experience that, dns checks eliminates loads of spam

I thought there was an rfc that stipulates, 1 fqdn with 1 ip per ptr record.