[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Samba Access



Shawn Lamson wrote:
On Mon, 21 Apr 2003 19:07:05 -0500
Donald Spoon <dspoon@astcomm.net> wrote:


I struggled getting the Windows ---> Samba ---> CUPS ---> HP printer route going here. The solution I finally wound up using was to use a "Post Script" driver on the Windows machine. I used the "generic" PS windows driver from Adobe, but if your printer has one already
available in Windows, then you could probably use it.  The regualar HP
PCL drivers in Windows "should" be able to be made to work, but I
never got the right combo.  CUPS will accept PS input just fine.


Don could you possibly detail the way you implemented this?  What would
a Windows user do to print?  Or if you know this is documented somewhere
please give me the link.

Thank you,
Shawn Lamson

1. The first step was to get CUPS working as a network print server. Dunno if this is absolutely necessary, but I did it here because I have a mixed linux/windows network of 5 machines on the LAN. I can expand upon this step if you want... I have found the steps needed to complete this vary depending on which version of CUPS you are using. I am currently using the one from Debian "unstable".

2. The second was to setup SAMBA per the directions. I believe it took only 1 or 2 edits on the /etc/samba/smb.conf file.... These are the lines I changed:

printing = cups
printcap name = /etc/printcap.cups

You might need to do some stuff in the [Printers] section of the file. I don't think I changed anything there.

3. Install a PostScript driver on the Windows machines. All I did was get the "Generic Postscript Driver" for Windows from the ADOBE web site and installed it on the windows machine(s). http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/main.html The installer leads you through the setup, including hooking up to a network printer. You could also do the same with an existing PS driver already on the Windows install, I think. I haven't tried this....

Cheers,
-Don Spoon-




Reply to: