Bug 432841 - Selecting multiple pages per sheets modifies the pages to print
Summary: Selecting multiple pages per sheets modifies the pages to print
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 432258
Alias: None
Product: okular
Classification: Applications
Component: printing (other bugs)
Version First Reported In: 20.12.2
Platform: Debian testing Linux
: NOR normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Okular developers
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2021-02-12 09:38 UTC by John Fransen
Modified: 2026-01-13 15:29 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Latest Commit:
Version Fixed/Implemented In:
Sentry Crash Report:

Attachments
Add an attachment

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description John Fransen 2021-02-12 09:38:11 UTC 
SUMMARY

Selecting multiple pages per sheets modifies the printing pages, I wanted to print pages 237-241 of a PDF on my HP color laserjet M245DW. To limit the paper usage I selected 'Pages per sheet' to be used: 2(2 x 1). I've got pages 473-480 of the PDF on the printer output

STEPS TO REPRODUCE
1. Load a PDF via Okular
2. Select print in 'File' menu
3. Select 'Options' of print popup screen
4. Select from 'Options' - 'Pages' --> fill is a range within the number of pages of the PDF
5. Select 'Properties' of print popup screen
6. Modify from 'Page tab' in new popup screen section 'Page layout' the 'Pages per sheet' the default '1(1x1)' into '2(2x1)'.
7. Select 'OK'
8. Select 'Print' of print popup screen

OBSERVED RESULT

Instead of pages 237-241 I've got 473-480.

EXPECTED RESULT

Pages 237-241.



SOFTWARE/OS VERSIONS

Linux/KDE Plasma: Debian GNU/Linux
--> Using bullseye
KDE Plasma Version: 5.20.5
KDE Frameworks Version: 5.78.0
Qt Version: 5.15.2

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Comment 1 Jörg Afflerbach 2026-01-04 07:21:58 UTC 
I have the same issue. 2(2 x 1) pages per sheet, duplex, selected pages 5 to 8  (= 4 pages → 1 sheet of paper). Got pages 9 to 13 (= 5 pages → 2 sheets wasted).

Okular: 25.08.3
KDE Frameworks: 6.19.0
Qt: 6.10.0
CachyOS
Comment 2 Jörg Afflerbach 2026-01-04 07:28:07 UTC 
This sounds pretty much like bug 432258.
Comment 3 aristsakas 2026-01-13 13:15:46 UTC 
(In reply to Jörg Afflerbach from comment #2)
> This sounds pretty much like bug 432258.

i think it is identical. Should we mark this as duplicate??
Comment 4 Jörg Afflerbach 2026-01-13 15:29:52 UTC 

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 432258 ***