- WLUG - wlug.mailman3.com

Re: [Wlug] printers

by Son Nguyen

Charles and all, LPRng is not bad at all. For those who still have it available for use and have been working with it for a while, it works great. For beginners, I forsee the use of CUPS ia an easier learning curves. In my situation, I have to upgrade all of my linux boxes every two years. Sinces cups is built in to the distributions that I am using it is best for me to adapt to the change (as long as it does not disrupt functionality and the way my users works). Last I have checked, LPRng is not be updated recently ( I could be wrong). Its just seems to be a bit painful to build LPRng into new distributions that already have working printing solution. >From what I have read so far...some of us are having issues here and there with cups. I guess...luck fo rme...I have not. Sonny >From: Chuck Haines <chaines(a)gmail.com> >Reply-To: Chuck Haines <chaines(a)gmail.com>, Worcester Linux Users Group<wlug(a)mail.wlug.org> >To: Worcester Linux Users Group <wlug(a)mail.wlug.org> >Subject: Re: [Wlug] printers >Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2004 11:25:48 -0400 > >LPRng is not that bad for a print server. In the ECE dept at WPI, we >use LPRng beause CUPS IMHO is still rather buggy. We've tried >switching over to CUPS on many occasions however have always ran into >a bug that prevents us from performing the switch over. We've also >used CUPS on our other servers to connet to the printer server running >LPRng and have run into some troubles with that, which we have not >using LPRng. > >Chuck > >On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 13:21:45 +0000, Son Nguyen <snguyen(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > Don, > > > > I would recommend not using LPRng. It is too old. I understand that CUPS > > seems difficult, but once you understand it, it is the next best thing. In > > my office, I have setup my kickstart to install 300+ printers on all of my > > Redhat Linux V3 Workstation machines (100+). You can configure it via > > console, applet, or even web. Fedora and Redhat has gone that route and I > > believe that others have too. It is much better than LPRng can every be. > > > > Sonny > > > > &gt;From: &quot;Don Peterson&quot; &lt;dpeterson(a)sterilite.com&gt; > > &gt;Reply-To: Worcester Linux Users Group &lt;wlug(a)mail.wlug.org&gt; > > &gt;To: &quot;Worcester Linux Users Group&quot; &lt;wlug(a)mail.wlug.org&gt; > > &gt;Subject: RE: [Wlug] printers > > &gt;Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2004 08:13:56 -0400 > > &gt; > > &gt;Thanx for the reply John. > > &gt;I had looked into CUPS but it looked pretty involved (the install and > > &gt;setup). > > &gt;Maybe I will give LPRng a shot. > > &gt; > > &gt;-----Original Message----- > > &gt;From: wlug-bounces(a)mail.wlug.org [mailto:wlug-bounces@mail.wlug.org] On > > &gt;Behalf Of John Stoffel > > &gt;Sent: Wednesday, September 01, 2004 3:51 PM > > &gt;To: Worcester Linux Users Group > > &gt;Subject: Re: [Wlug] printers > > &gt; > > &gt; > > &gt;Don&gt; I've got a quick question about printers. Is there a > > printers.conf > > &gt; > > &gt;Don&gt; file in Red Hat like there is in Solaris (I couldn't find one). > > &gt;Don&gt; Here's my issue: > > &gt; > > &gt;Don&gt; I have 5 servers in a 9i RAC array and I don't want to set up my > > 50 > > &gt; > > &gt;Don&gt; printers on each server. Can anyone suggest a way to > > &quot;copy&quot; > > &gt;Don&gt; the printers I set up on one server to the other 4? > > &gt; > > &gt;Sure, just setup one box as your master, using LPRng. Then you install > > &gt;LPRng on all the client systems with an /etc/printcap sorta like this: > > &gt; > > &gt; # LPRng: /etc/printcap file > > &gt; # > > &gt; # Forward all jobs to the print server > > &gt; # > > &gt; *:force_localhost@:client:rm=printmaster.foo.com > > &gt; > > &gt; > > &gt;Then when you add/delete printers on the server, they appear on the > > &gt;client without any intervention. > > &gt; > > &gt;Now, I can't say I love LPRng, mostly because the Docs are baroque and > > &gt;hard to follow, and the output of various commands is also archane. > > &gt; > > &gt;You might want to look at using CUPS instead, since it's based on and > > &gt;support the Internet Printing Protocol. I use CUPS at home and it's > > &gt;fine. > > &gt; > > &gt;_______________________________________________ > > &gt;Wlug mailing list > > &gt;Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org > > &gt;http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug > > &gt; > > &gt;_______________________________________________ > > &gt;Wlug mailing list > > &gt;Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org > > &gt;http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Wlug mailing list > > Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org > > http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug > > > > > >-- >Chuck Haines >chaines(a)gmail.com >------------------------------------------- >Tau Kappa Epsilon Fraternity >WPI Class of 2005 >------------------------------------------- >AIM: CyberGrex >YIM: CyberGrex_27 >ICQ: 3707881 >------------------------------------------- >_______________________________________________ >Wlug mailing list >Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org >http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug

Sept. 6, 2004

Re: [Wlug] printers

by Son Nguyen

Keith, >From: Keith Wright <kwright(a)free-comp-shop.com> >Reply-To: Worcester Linux Users Group <wlug(a)mail.wlug.org> >To: wlug(a)mail.wlug.org >Subject: Re: [Wlug] printers >Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2004 17:26:53 -0400 > > > From: "Son Nguyen" <snguyen(a)hotmail.com> > > > > I would recommend not using LPRng. It is too old. > >As an old codger in training, I take that personally. >You remind me of Perlis's comment on Algol60: > Not perfect, but a big improvement over its successors. > This commend is not meant to insult. Just that almost every distributions are using cups. I have had request from my users that I should retro fit lrpng into my network. Although it is not impossible, it is less versitile than cups. I have not had much problems with both the applets and web based configuration. >I don't even know what LPRng is, I suppose it's the New-Gnu version >of the ancient bin/lpr program, from back in the days when programs >were more prized for working than for having a Web interface. I totally agree. I would rather use the console command instead, but it is nice to have an alternative configuration method for those who are not confortable at the command line. > >My printer is attached to a dual boot machine that now runs >Linux only, with a Samba server so that Diane can print >via the network from her laptop. It worked pretty much >the first time, the main problem being getting the Windows >laptop to notice it. > >I can print from the printer/Linux machine, but when I tried >to use the much-touted CUPS web-based set-up to connect to the >printer from another Linux machine, it went totaly wonky. >Certain buttons sent the browser in an apparent infinite loop. >(By Turing, you can never be sure, but I waited long with no action) >Sometimes it would take me to some crazy random place in the >Internet, to pictures of buildings that had the same name >as my server machine, as though some mad programmer had >rewritten bin/hostname to search Google for its name. > Have you considered connecting the printer to the windows box, share it and then map it via the linux? How about a a dsl router with the network printer capability? I love the external jetdirect parrellel to ethernet device. >It was not high priority, since ftp works and I have to walk >to the printer machine anyway to get the paper, so I quit. > > > I understand that CUPS seems difficult, but once you understand it, > > it is the next best thing. > >At first I thought you were recommending it as second-best, but >maybe "next best" means Best Real Soon Now. > > > In my office, I have setup my kickstart > > to install 300+ printers on all of my Redhat Linux V3 Workstation > > machines (100+). > >Eh? You need 300 printers for 100 workstations? > My offices are in Bedford (MA), McLean (VA), NJ, and Tampa (FL). I have to allow users to printer to any printers on my network for virtual meeting purposes. Sonny > > You can configure it via console, applet, or even web. > >Not me, maybe you can. > > > Fedora and Redhat has gone that route and I believe that > > others have too. It is much better than LPRng can every be. > >Oh, I suppose, but much better can you make something that >does what I used to with "cat scratch.ps >/dev/lp0"? > > -- Keith >_______________________________________________ >Wlug mailing list >Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org >http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug

Sept. 6, 2004

Re: [Wlug] vendor recommendation

by Charles R. Anderson

On Sun, Sep 05, 2004 at 08:03:02AM -0700, Mike Leo wrote: > I have heard in the past that you cannot buy a dell > with only linux on it....they have some special deal > with MS that says every PC they sell MUST have some > version of windows. They will install linux only as a > duel boot. That's only true for desktops, not servers. The best way to buy a Dell Linux system for desktop use is to get a Dell PowerEdge 400SC. It is their entry-level tower server, but it uses the exact same motherboard as their Dimension line, so it has an AGP slot on it (they don't tell you this in their literature). So you buy this in the barebones minimum configuration with the 800MHz FSB P4 CPU you want, add more DDR400 RAM from crucial.com (cheaper than Dell's RAM), and get your own video card separately. You can get Linux preinstalled, or get no OS at all. Plus it usually comes with a 3 year on-site next-business day warranty...

Sept. 5, 2004

Re: [Wlug] vendor recommendation

by Mike Leo

I have heard in the past that you cannot buy a dell with only linux on it....they have some special deal with MS that says every PC they sell MUST have some version of windows. They will install linux only as a duel boot. Not sure if that is still true...anyone know for sure? --- Gary Hanley <gary(a)hanley.net> wrote: > On Sun, 5 Sep 2004, Karl Hiramoto wrote: > > http://www.pcsforeveryone.com/ in cambridge will > install various Linux > > distros. I just bought a machine last week for > work there. > > Short of building your own, I would recommend these > guys also. I haven't > bought one there myself but I know people who have > and were happy. > > Of course, I would recommend almost anyone but Dell. > :-) > > Why not Dell? > > Because Dell doesn't do AMD and AMD64 is ruling the > price/performance > ratios at all levels against Intel right now and for > the foreseeable > future. > > Plus, they are an underdog...and we like underdogs! > > -- Gary > _______________________________________________ > Wlug mailing list > Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org > http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

Sept. 5, 2004

Re: [Wlug] vendor recommendation

by Gary Hanley

On Sun, 5 Sep 2004, Karl Hiramoto wrote: > http://www.pcsforeveryone.com/ in cambridge will install various Linux > distros. I just bought a machine last week for work there. Short of building your own, I would recommend these guys also. I haven't bought one there myself but I know people who have and were happy. Of course, I would recommend almost anyone but Dell. :-) Why not Dell? Because Dell doesn't do AMD and AMD64 is ruling the price/performance ratios at all levels against Intel right now and for the foreseeable future. Plus, they are an underdog...and we like underdogs! -- Gary

Sept. 5, 2004

Re: [Wlug] vendor recommendation

by Karl Hiramoto

http://www.pcsforeveryone.com/ in cambridge will install various Linux distros. I just bought a machine last week for work there. Baris Hasdemir wrote: >hi list, > >Would you guys give me recommendations for a company around >Massachusetts selling Linux pre-installed desktop computers at a good >price/performance ratio? > >I would also appreciate Linux pre-installed laptop/notebook sellers are >welcome, as well though I think that it is harder to find. > >Thank you >baris > >_______________________________________________ >Wlug mailing list >Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org >http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug > > -- ¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø Karl Hiramoto <karl(a)hiramoto.org> Work: 978-425-2090 ext 25 Cell: 508-517-4819 http://karl.hiramoto.org/ AOL IM ID = KarlH420 Yahoo_IM = karl_hiramoto ¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø Old age is too high a price to pay for maturity.

Sept. 5, 2004

vendor recommendation

by Baris Hasdemir

hi list, Would you guys give me recommendations for a company around Massachusetts selling Linux pre-installed desktop computers at a good price/performance ratio? I would also appreciate Linux pre-installed laptop/notebook sellers are welcome, as well though I think that it is harder to find. Thank you baris

Sept. 5, 2004

Re: [Wlug] memtest hangs

by John Ferreira

I recently ran into something like this. Exactly the same symptoms. Intel motherboard with pc2100. Ended up being the motherboard itself. I kept hanging on the same test, between 2% and 8% completion. The test did run to 100% if I ESC out before the first test runs, and manually select that test to run by itself. Might be worth a try. I also tested the memory and processor in a second motherboard, and they checked out ok. Same processor and memory are running fine in the new motherboard. Good Luck. --- Gregory Avedissian <gma2004(a)verizon.net> wrote: > I'm testing some DDR ram (one pc2100 and one pc2700) in a dell 4500s > (1.8GHz Intel) and memtest hangs on the second test - Address Test, Own > Address, No Cache. > > I've tested the sticks together and separately, and the same thing > happens. The test just stops after a minute or two, with no error messages > and loss of keyboard control. Tested one stick in a different computer, > and it tests fine. It's a brand new memory chip. > > The Dell seems to run slower than I'd expect for a 1.8GHz with 384MB RAM. > I especially noticed it when I was installing software from source > packages - it went a lot slower than on my 1.2GHz Athlon with 500MB of > pc133. Other than that, it seems to run ok. > > Here are my questions: Is it obviously the cpu? Is there any linux > software that will test the cpu similar to what memtest does with memory? > Any suggestions for diagnosing this problem? > > Thanks, > Greg > > _______________________________________________ > Wlug mailing list > Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org > http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

Sept. 5, 2004

Re: [Wlug] Where do we eat?

by Frank

On Sat, Sep 04, 2004 at 12:22:51PM -0400, Carlton C. Stedman II wrote: > > I would have thought that 'Why do we eat?' would be a higher stage > > than 'Where do lunch?', but perhaps it is just a matter of taste. > > Which question seems more civilized may depend upon whether you > > are a French philosopher facing a plate full of jellied liver, > > or a film producer facing a starlet. > > No, no. First off, its a quote from Douglas Adams' Hitchhiker's Guide To > The Galaxy. Second, the idea is that after one finds how to do something, > the next step is to ask why they do it, all existential-like, and finally > the people eventually get tired of that and grow fat and stupid. Heh, I took a different meaning away from that quote... Adams referred to these stages as 1) Survival, 2) Inquiry, and 3) Sophistication. I don't think sophistication necessarily requires fat and stupid people, but I will agree that decadence and sophistication are often confused. > Hence: > > > And the web interfaces are generally a sign of civilization moving > > > from the 'How can we eat?' stage past the 'Why do we eat?' and > > > straight to the 'Where shall we have lunch?' stage... > > Implies that web interfaces are for the weak. This is silly, web > interfaces are very froody, and so easy to use, they make an excellent > alternative to command-line file editing, in many cases. > > CCS <SNIP> Not at all, I don't think that web interfaces are for the weak. They are another tool in the toolbox and get used and abused like any other... Frank

Sept. 4, 2004

Re: [Wlug] printers

by Frank

On Sat, Sep 04, 2004 at 11:04:22AM -0400, Andy Stewart wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > > Hi everybody, > > While I happen to use CUPS, I'd like to note that there is at least one other > person who had an unhappy first experience. Eric Raymond documents his > experience here: > http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cups-horror.html Even though I do have a couple of disagreements with his various points, it was a very good article and probably doubly helpful in that it allows people to admit that they are having trouble with something (If ESR can't get it to work, why would they be afraid to admit it? His followup article mentions this effect a bit.). > Perhaps Chapter 3 of "The User's Guide to the Gimp-Print Top Quality Printer > Drivers" (authored by yours truly) would be of help in configuring CUPS for a > very basic installation. This document is available here: > http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net/users-guide.pdf > > Admittedly, this doesn't cover the "login" window presented by the CUPS > interface. After searching the web for some time, I can't find the > documentation which describes how to setup accounts which give users > permission to modify certain aspects of CUPS. It must be somewhere on the > CUPS website. The CUPS website FAQ had a reference that I stumbled across while looking something up for my response earlier. (http://cups.org/faq.php?16) > When I first configured CUPS, I couldn't for the life of me figure out whether > to use http, IPP, or otherwise, in describing my printer, and there was no > guidance to help determine the proper choice. The CUPS admin web page asking > for "device URI" confounded me for quite some time. I found the examples on > that web page unhelpful. > > Now that I have it working, I am happy with it, but admittedly it was rather > frustrating to do the first time. In my opinion, the web interface should be > so simple that I don't *need* to read the manual - at least for a very basic > installation. > > Later, > > Andy <SNIP> I think this is where the CUPS web interface does begin to fall down. They have a lot of documentation elsewhere and you end up having to read a large portion of it to be able to configure things using the web interface. Frank

Sept. 4, 2004