Need help using a windows XP printer over Samba
Geico Caveman
Office that has no non-Windows driver printers.
An unused XP machine.
What I want to do:
I want to set up print sharing on the XP machine and use the network to
send print jobs to that windows XP machine from my Mac.
NB: No Mac/Linux drivers for the printers in question exist.
I set up the printer on XP (and I might have made mistakes following
multiple Google pages - see for instance):
http://opensuse.swerdna.org/susesambaprint.html
(Since both Linux and Mac use Samba, the client OS here is immaterial).
I chose generic postscript printer since nothing else made sense.
Upshot:
smbclient -L 10.174.41.138
timeout connecting to 10.174.41.138:445
timeout connecting to 10.174.41.138:139
Error connecting to 10.174.41.138 (Operation already in progress)
Connection to 10.174.41.138 failed (Error NT_STATUS_ACCESS_DENIED)
Can't connect to the darned windows machine.
Any solutions to this ?
Caveat: I have very little familiarity with windows XP since I use
Linux and Mac predominantly.
Conor
in Control Panel, Firewall, Exceptions add the ports required.
If it doesn't work with the firewall disabled, create a user account on
the XP box with the same login user/pass used on the mac.
--
Conor
www.notebooks-r-us.co.uk
Tim Murray
> I chose generic postscript printer since nothing else made sense.
Most office printers don't have PostScript, so I'd check that.
notbob
> Any solutions to this ?
Certainly! ;)
You need to load LPrng on one of your mac or linux machines, then read
this book, free online:
http://oreilly.com/catalog/samba/chapter/book/
Then, when you get samba configured and a linux or mac box operating
as a print server on your network, you can use whatever native XP
drivers and printer software your printer and XP are happy with.
Samba and LPrng will be transparent between the XP box and the
printer. I know this is so, cuz I've done it and it's not really that
difficult. Jes one chapter in the book covers it and even dummy me
pulled it off between a Brother laser jet and an ancient W98se box.
The book is ancient, too, but the info is still valid for LPrng and
samba.
Good luck.
nb
Robert Heller
Many (most/all?) *Laser* printers are PostScript printers.
>
>
--
Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933
Deepwoods Software -- Download the Model Railroad System
http://www.deepsoft.com/ -- Binaries for Linux and MS-Windows
hel...@deepsoft.com -- http://www.deepsoft.com/ModelRailroadSystem/
The Natural Philosopher
> At Wed, 25 Aug 2010 20:25:51 -0400 Tim Murray <no-...@thankyou.com> wrote:
>
>> Geico Caveman wrote:
>>> I chose generic postscript printer since nothing else made sense.
>> Most office printers don't have PostScript, so I'd check that.
>
> Many (most/all?) *Laser* printers are PostScript printers.
>
And CUPS itself can talk HP PCL...for the rest.
>>
>
Chris F.A. Johnson
> At Wed, 25 Aug 2010 20:25:51 -0400 Tim Murray <no-...@thankyou.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Geico Caveman wrote:
>> > I chose generic postscript printer since nothing else made sense.
>>
>> Most office printers don't have PostScript, so I'd check that.
>
> Many (most/all?) *Laser* printers are PostScript printers.
Certainly not all. Probably not most.
--
Chris F.A. Johnson, <http://cfajohnson.com>
Author:
Pro Bash Programming: Scripting the GNU/Linux Shell (2009, Apress)
Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)
Douglas Mayne
I don't know exactly* how Windows printing is supposed to work, but I'll
take a WAG at this. IMO, the OP is going to run into problems printing
anything beyond simple text using this method. However, I agree that this
looks like the only possibility if the OP's printer is "windows only." In
other words, it could be true that only Windows knows how to send the
magic incantations to the printer to be able to properly format WYSIWYG
documents. Simple documents may work with the method (using default font
and margins of printer).
BTW, as advice to the OP, Windows XP SP3 has more security turned on by
default. These were changes for the better, IMO. For any printer that you
want to use, you need to share the printer _and_ enable the exception on
the firewall.
*AIUI, Windows idea of printer sharing is a bit weak. Instead of exposing
a "neutral" device which expects postscript**, pcl, or some other
arbitrary printer esperanto, the print share expects input in the
printers native tongue. That is why the Samba book you referenced
explains installing the native windows drivers for other /* Windows */
computers to download. Once the printer is installed on a /* Windows */
computer, it gains the ability to speak the native printer language. GNU/
Linux can also use the printer share, subject to the same restriction.
That is, if an appropriate print filter exists for the device, then it
will work fine. If not, then I think you're SOL. That is how I think it
works, but I could be wrong.
**If you want to print to postscript on the Windows only printer, you can
probably do it- albeit in a two step process. The first step is to setup
pdfcreator on the Windows computer where the _Windows only_ hardware
printer exists.
You can get PDFCreator here:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/pdfcreator/
Setup PDFCreator as a shared printer. This "printer" accepts postscript
and collects them into jobs for conversion to pdf files. The resulting
pdf files can be printed on any printer, including the Windows only
printer. Setup your linux box to send jobs to pdfcreator using a generic
postscript driver. For example, CUPS has a printer manufacturer "generic"
which has several drivers, including "generic postscript printer." This
is a kludge and a multistep process, but I think it does work- either for
Linux or Mac clients and from any desktop linux app.
One more thing, and going slightly off-topic, the latest Windows printer
bug to bite me was using remote desktop. I learned (after a few hours
trying to fix this) that any "local" printer which you want to use in
your "remote" session, must be installed at the remote location first.
This is for the exact same reason as above- the printer communications
will take place in the native printer language. If this the remote
computer does not know how to communicate with the printer, then it won't
be listed among the available printers.
--
Douglas Mayne
Tim Murray
> At Wed, 25 Aug 2010 20:25:51 -0400 Tim Murray <no-...@thankyou.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Geico Caveman wrote:
>>> I chose generic postscript printer since nothing else made sense.
>>
>> Most office printers don't have PostScript, so I'd check that.
>
> Many (most/all?) *Laser* printers are PostScript printers.
>
I don't know where you work, but my customers are all large corporate
clients like Home Depot, UPS, Coke, Cingular, Verizon, etc., and among many
hundreds of printers throughout the buildings, the ones with PostScript are
few and far between. A very common price to add PostScript to the big
Ricohs and such is $600.
Jolly Roger
Tim Murray <no-...@thankyou.com> wrote:
I think you simply need to qualify your statement like so:
"Most Windows office printers don't have PostScript, so I'd check that."
These Windows printers are, by and large, PCL-only printers. During the
past decade or two, lots of printer manufacturers have gone the cheap
rout offering PCL-only printers.
--
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.
JR
Robert Heller
Amazon.com sells a Brother Laser printer (HL-5370DW) for like $250.
This printer speaks PostScript. I believe there are even cheaper
Brother Laser printers that speak PostScript. I believe just about ALL
HP and Brother *Laser* printers speak PostScript -- basically all but
the very low-end models.
*InkJet* printers (including office models and all-in-ones) pretty much
*don't* do PostScript.
Robert Heller
>
> In article <f6Pdo.16348$LL1....@newsfe24.iad>,
> Tim Murray <no-...@thankyou.com> wrote:
>
> > Robert Heller wrote:
> > > At Wed, 25 Aug 2010 20:25:51 -0400 Tim Murray <no-...@thankyou.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >> Geico Caveman wrote:
> > >>> I chose generic postscript printer since nothing else made sense.
> > >>
> > >> Most office printers don't have PostScript, so I'd check that.
> > >
> > > Many (most/all?) *Laser* printers are PostScript printers.
> > >
> >
> > I don't know where you work, but my customers are all large corporate
> > clients like Home Depot, UPS, Coke, Cingular, Verizon, etc., and among many
> > hundreds of printers throughout the buildings, the ones with PostScript are
> > few and far between. A very common price to add PostScript to the big
> > Ricohs and such is $600.
>
> I think you simply need to qualify your statement like so:
>
> "Most Windows office printers don't have PostScript, so I'd check that."
>
> These Windows printers are, by and large, PCL-only printers. During the
> past decade or two, lots of printer manufacturers have gone the cheap
> rout offering PCL-only printers.
Most of these 'cheap' office printers are InkJet printers. InkJet
printers don't implement PostScript.
There are 'cheap' *laser* printers that are PostScript. Brother laser
printers call it "BR-Script3" -- BR-Script3 is just Brother's name for
their PostScript 3 engine. A Brother laser printer with "BR-Script3"
support is a PostScript printer.
notbob
> looks like the only possibility if the OP's printer is "windows only." In
> other words, it could be true that only Windows knows how to send the
> magic incantations to the printer to be able to properly format WYSIWYG
> documents. Simple documents may work with the method (using default font
> and margins of printer).
I'm not sure what you mean and I'm baffled by all this "postscript"
talk. My method requires a linux box or mac osx box be the print
server. Naturally, this requires a printer that is *nix compatible.
Otherwise, I don't see it happening. If the printer will run under
*nix, it will work brilliantly for the XP box. As I said, the linux
server will be transparent to the XP box and the windows software. If the
XP box has software for that printer, it will print whatever it would
print as if it were connected directly, including graphics.
I don't see the XP box being a print server for a non-all-M$ network
anyway, anyhow. Bill and the boys jes don't play that game.
IOW:
XP ----> linux/mac -----> printer IT CAN WORK[1]
linux/mac ----> XP -----> printer NEVER GONNA HAPPEN!
[1]The only time a postscript printer even matters is if there are no
available *nix drivers for the printer.
nb
mjt
notbob <not...@nothome.com> wrote:
> On 2010-08-26, Douglas Mayne <no...@invalid.com> wrote:
>
> > looks like the only possibility if the OP's printer is "windows
> > only." In other words, it could be true that only Windows knows how
> > to send the magic incantations to the printer to be able to
> > properly format WYSIWYG documents. Simple documents may work with
> > the method (using default font and margins of printer).
>
> I'm not sure what you mean and I'm baffled by all this "postscript"
> talk.
Printers basically only understand one or two
PDL "languages", The two most notable are
Postscript and PCL (Printer Control Language).
Postscript is a markup language to describe
text formatting and image information.
A majority of low-end printers do not support
the Postscript language. If the printer supports
Postscript, then the client machine can simply
specify a Postscript driver and the printer data
stream can be sent to the destination printer.
If the printer is NOT a Postscript printer, a
printer-device-specific driver must be used in
order to "convert" the document/image to be
printed, so that that printer data stream can
be sent to, and be understood by, the destination
printer.
Postscript is a standardized printer language, so
most any "generic" Postscript driver can be used
to convert the document formatting/image data into
Postscript. The same can't be said about a non-
Postscript printer - in most instances, the non-
Postscript printer uses a proprietary PCL language
and a dedicated driver specific for the destination
printer must be used.
--
I am so optimistic about beef prices that I've just leased a pot roast
with an option to buy.
<<< Remove YOURSHOES to email me >>>
Jolly Roger
Robert Heller <hel...@deepsoft.com> wrote:
> At Fri, 27 Aug 2010 09:17:20 -0500 Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:
>
> There are 'cheap' *laser* printers that are PostScript. Brother laser
> printers call it "BR-Script3" -- BR-Script3 is just Brother's name for
> their PostScript 3 engine. A Brother laser printer with "BR-Script3"
> support is a PostScript printer.
Tell that to the millions of clueless people who purchase PCL-only laser
printers for their office.
John Hasler
> ...a printer-device-specific driver must be used...
Just to clarify, note that this is not a "driver" in the Linux sense of
a kernel device driver. It is a user-space program. In proper Unix
jargon it is a filter.
--
John Hasler
jha...@newsguy.com
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI USA
notbob
> A majority of low-end printers do not support
> the Postscript language. If the printer supports
> Postscript, then the client machine can simply
> specify a Postscript driver and the printer data
> stream can be sent to the destination printer.
I think I said as much. I've yet to own a postscript printer of any
kind and have successfully printed from both windows and linux boxes
on the same printer. These were all printers supported by LPrng or
CUPS, of course. As I also said, if you don't have a printer
supported by these two, you're probably gonna need a postscript
printer.
So far, I've yet to hear the name of the OPs printer, so I can't say.
Did he mention it? Is it so ancient and decrepit and obscure there
are no drivers for linux/OSx, anywhere? I may have missed it, but I
see ppl going straight into the need for a postscript printer, which
is not necessarily the case. Maybe the guy jes needs to buy a new
printer, and NOT a postscript printer.
nb
mjt
notbob <not...@nothome.com> wrote:
> So far, I've yet to hear the name of the OPs printer, so I can't say.
> Did he mention it?
Nope - the OP originally posted on the 23rd and
has yet to show their face again.
--
The modern child will answer you back before you've said anything.
- Laurence J. Peter