Re: 2.2 with IPmasq and LP
At 1/29/99 01:47 AM +0100, Dietrich Kraus wrote:
>On Thu, Jan 28, 1999 at 11:56:50AM -0500, Jay Barbee wrote:
>> My initial install of the kernel 2.2.0 was not too good. I have to admit,
>> I do not keep up with the development kernels, only the stable ones... so I
>> felt very newbie-ish upon the problems.
>>
>> IPMasq... It is simply not setup the same. ipfwadm does not work anymore
>> and I needed to use ipchains. also adding the 'echo "1" >
>> /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward' was something new as well.
>>
>> Once this was in place diald and ppp was working (PPP built in the kernel
>> and SLIP as a module).
>>
>> LP, however, I cannot figure out. I have parport (tried in the kernel and
>> as module), parport_pc.o and lp.o all built. I cannot get it to detect my
>> printer? I know it is going to use /dev/lp0 instead of /dev/lp1, but the
>> kernel reports that no devices have been found? very odd. All I have to
>> do is reboot to my previous 2.0.36 kernel and it detects the printer fine.
>>
>Have a look at /usr/src/linux/Documentation/parport.txt. The following works
>for me.
>
>/etc/conf.modules:
>alias parport_lowlevel parport_pc
>options parport_pc io=0x378 irq=7
>
>nestor:/usr/src/linux$ lsmod
>Module Size Used by
>parport_pc 5048 1 (autoclean)
>lp 4280 1 (autoclean)
>parport 6444 1 (autoclean) [parport_pc lp]
>
Yeah... I do have that in conf.modules! I don't seem to have any problems
with any modules, but I do not think they are autoloaded? I need to
insmod parport ; insmod parport_pc ; insmod lp
All load, but and parport is using parport_pc and lp in brackets. But lp
is in use by nothing?! The kernel reports not finding any printing
devices. Is there a way to autoload parport and parport_pc (except for a
script with insmod)? I cannot just put it in /etc/modules.
Also could I be missing so kernel parameters that should go in lilo? I
think now I have 'lp=parport0'.
I got about 4 or 5 responses yesterday, but I have not had a chance to
reboot back to 2.2 to play around again. Thanks all!
--Jay
Reply to: