Re: network print server
On Sat, 2003-01-11 at 21:21, Michael West wrote:
> I have been using samba as a print server at home, but
> I am often mucking around on my debian box, and sometimes this
> results in my wife not being able to print.
>
> To increase user satisfaction I am considering purchasing one of
> these dedicated print server appliances which attach directly to
> the network. It must work for win98, XP pro and Debian. Ideally
> it would have parallel and usb support.
>
> I am looking for recommendation as to where to research what would
> work best. I couldn't find anything at linuxprinting.org on this.
>
I would guess that just about any printserver will work fine for you. I
have been using a Linksys 3-port printserver (has three parallel ports)
for several years without any problems. While I don't think this
particular model is still available, I would imagine that the current
models work quite similarly; in fact, there was info on the Linksys
website when I first bought it that told me how to make it work with
linux.
The printserver that I have has a built-in lpd server, so you just talk
to it using lpd. It may also support IPP, I'm not totally sure of this.
It was easier to configure under Linux - I just told CUPS to use it as
an lpd server at DeviceURI lpd://192.168.1.10/L1. This particular device
labels its three ports L1, L2, and L3. There are instructions for
setting the IP address for the device here:
http://www.linksys.com/support/support.asp?spid=18#tcpip
and you can do this using telnet or tftp pretty easily.
Under W95/98, it was actually a bit harder to set up because I had to
install supplied "TCP redirector" software which basically allowed me to
create "printer ports" that redirect to the printserver. I think this is
much easier under XP as my understanding is that XP supports IPP
directly. I'm not totally sure about this as I pretty much boot my
windows 98 machine only for Quicken, and even that's going away now with
Quicken working pretty well under CrossoverOffice/Wine.
Good luck.
nl
Reply to: