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

Re: LPC error: Can't open connection



Kent West wrote:
> 
> Hi.
> 
> I'm new to Linux/Unix; don't know what I'm doing. I'm trying to set up a
> printer/beeper combo (see earlier messages), but I seem to have broken
> my printing capability. To eliminate complications, I've commented out
> everything except the following from my /etc/printcap file.
> 
> lp|Nimrod|HPNimrod|HP LaserJet 4SiMX:\
>         :lp=/dev/null:sd=/var/spool/lpd/HPNimrod:\
>         :sh:pw#80:pl#72:px#1440:mx#0:\
>         :if=/etc/magicfilter/ljet4m-filter:\
>         :af=/var/log/lp-acct:lf=/var/log/lp-errs:\
>         :rm=150.252.128.20:\
>         :rp=nimrod_2
> 
> Now, whenever I do "lpc reread all", I get the error message "cannot
> open connection to 'all@localhost' - Connection refused". I can however
> do an "lpc reread lp" or "lp reread HPNimrod", etc. The same situation
> happens when I try "lpc printcap all" vs "lpc printcap HPNimrod" The
> first command gives the error. The second command does not appear to do
> anything.
> 
> In case it's relevant, here's the permissions on my /var/spool/lpd
> directories:
> drwxr-sr-x      2       root    lp      1024 Sep 28 10:54 HPNimrod
> drwxr_xr_x      2       root    lp      1024 Sep 23 08:52 beeper
> 
> Also, in case it's relevant, contrary to what I've read in "Running
> Linux", a "ps ax" command does not show me any lpd daemon.I have been
> able to print before to this printer from this box, and I think even
> then I never saw an lpd daemon when I did a ps ax command.
> 
> Back in the Windows world, I'd reboot and expect things to start working
> again, but I'm trying to prove to myself that's not needed in Linux.
> 
> I hope someone can point me to a solution.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Kent West

Never mind; I'm an idiot. Just for kicks, I typed in lpd and it acted
like it started. Then my printing started working properly again.
Apparently my eyes just never would let me see the lpd daemon when I'd
do a "ps ax".


Reply to: