Craig,

On Thu, 23 Jan 2003 07:10:18 PST Craig Caughlin wrote:

> Hi folks,
> I've carefully followed the instructions at
> http://www.mysunrise.ch/users/cmu/dachlpd.htm to set up my Bering box as a
> print server, but it doesn't work (I can't print). I was getting some insmod
> error messages, and determined I was using the wrong parport.o,
> parport_pc.o, and lp.o drivers (from an older Bering version). It seems like
> I've seen posted here on the group a comment that the drivers you use MUST
> match your kernel version.

True.


> So, I downloaded both the
> Bering_1.0-stable_modules_2.4.18.tar.gz
> Bering_1.0-stable_modules_2.4.20.tar.gz module packages (drivers?) from
> http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=13751 , and I've used
> the parport.o, parport_pc.o, and lp.o drivers from the 2.4.18 package,

Good start.  Was there any output when you insmod'ed them?


> but I
> still can't print. How do I know if I'm using drivers from the right
> package?

If you're using Bering 1.0-stable,
Bering_1.0-stable_modules_2.4.18.tar.gz contains the correct
modules.  As a general rule, if insmod does not complain about
unresolved symbols, barf nasty error messages on the console,
or lock up the machine you're _usually_ okay.

If you're not feeling brave with your up-all-year firewall :-),
you should verify they were built from the same source tree and
config as your kernel.  For the case of Bering, that's probably
documented in the Bering install or user's guide somewhere, but
there is a chance it might not be as the 2.4.20 kernel was added
after most of the current docs were written.


> Hmmmm, I can't seem to figure out what I'm doing wrong. Does
> Shorewall have anything to do with this? Thank you!

If you are running tests from another host it could be.  Here's
how I would debug it:

  1) Verify the modules are properly loaded:

       lsmod | grep -e parport -e lp

     The three modules you loaded should show up.

  2) Check to see if you have parport entries in the /proc
     filesystem:

       find /proc/ -name 'parport*'

     Many drivers, including parport.o IIRC, add entries to the
     /proc filesystem when they are loaded.

  3) Verify you have a /dev/lp0 device:

       ls -l /dev/lp0

     Should look something like:

       brad@boxer:~$ ls -al /dev/lp0 
       crw-rw----    1 root     lp         6,   0 Jun 13  2001 /dev/lp0

  4) Test printing from the firewall:

       (echo foo; echo bar; echo) > /dev/lp0

     The page may not eject, but if the printer does anything
     that's a good sign.

  5) Verify that the daemon is started:

       svi p910nd stop; svi p910nd start
       ps -ef | grep p910

  6) Verify the daemon is bound to port 9100 (0x238C in hex):

       cat /proc/net/tcp | grep -i 238C

  7) Verify you can connect to that port from the print server:

       nc 192.168.1.254 9100

  8) Run "tail -f /var/log/syslog" on the print server and then
     verify you can connect to port 9100 from the printing client:

       telnet 192.168.1.254 9100

     or

       nc 192.168.1.254 9100
    
    (Watch for shorewall messages in the tail -f output as you
    attempt the connection.)

  9) Test printing as you normally would.


By breaking it down in steps and "working your way up the stack",
if you will, it should be easy to pinpoint where the problem is
and fix it.  (Many of these steps apply to debugging most services
under linux.  (For sshd, weblet and other libwrap-enabled services,
I would add a tail -f /var/log/auth.log to #8.))

Hope that helps.  If you get it working, you might consider
writing a "Bering Print Server" chapter for the User's Guide. ;-)

--Brad



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user
SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html

Reply via email to