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

Re: samba printer permissions problem



On Tue, Jul 02, 2002 at 01:16:22PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
| hi folks,
| 
| i have a problem connecting to a samba printer from a win2k machine.
| the windoze machine says "access denied, unable to connect" when i try
| to print to that printer, which is exported from samba as follows:

I'm not a samba guru, but I have managed to get it working for myself.

I think the problem is that
    1)  [printer] is not a "magic" section, thus you get a share named
            'printer'
    2)  due to #1, windows sees the printer named '\\192.168.20.21\printer'
    3)  when it connects, samba looks in /etc/printcap to fine the
            printer named 'printer' so it can forward the data to it.
However, the printer named 'printer' doesn't exist from lpd's
perspective.

Here's the relevant configuration that I have.  You can try it and try
adjusting it to fit your needs.


[global]
    printing = cups
    # printcap name = lpstat
    load printers = yes
    guest account = nobody
    invalid users = root
    

#
# A "magic" section.
#
[printers]
    comment = All Printers
    available = yes
    # spool dir
    directory = /tmp
    printable = yes
    public = yes
    writable = yes
    create mode = 0666
    browseable = yes

    guest ok = yes
    guest account = nobody


Changing "printing=cups" to "printing=bsd" should simply work, except
it would work with your print spooler instead of mine.  I think having
the 'guest ok' or 'public' or 'writeable' options may have an effect
on whether or not smb users are allowed to print to the printer.  I
have discovered that the smb user needs to have write permission on
the 'directory=' directory so that samba can temporarily spool the
file there before it feeds it to 'lp'.

HTH,
-D

-- 

No harm befalls the righteous,
but the wicked have their fill of trouble.
        Proverbs 12:21
 
http://dman.ddts.net/~dman/

Attachment: pgp7vpN6crQer.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: