Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 7387
Deskjet 600C on /dev/lp0 still not probed after updating /etc/conf.modules. Printer subsystem not starting so 'lpc' gets "connection refused"
Last modified: 2008-05-01 11:37:53 EDT
I've read the printer bugs and the recommended add to /etc/conf.modules (alias par something or other). After doing that I rebooted and I still get the error trying to add my printer that no printers were found on /dev/lp0-2. Then, when I went back into Bugzilla I couldn't get any of my queries to work and suddenly doubted how I got in there the first time! So, I'm submitting another bug report.
Make sure the printer port is activated and set to the correct mode (EPP or Bidirectional should do) in the BIOS.
The BIOS were cet to something like ECB, but I changed it to EPP1.9 and loaded the latest lpr from rawhide (1.47, I think) and when trying to add a printer I still get complaints that no devices were discovered on /dev/lp0, /dev/lp1, /dev/lp2. I haven't checked w95 since switching to epp, but my printer does (did) work over there, and on RHat 5.1. I discovered the reason my bugzilla query didn't work was I set the arch to ALL, thinking it would show me lpr bugs on ALL architectures, but instead it only shows lpr bugs affecting ALL archs.
Please send me a copy of your /etc/conf.modules and /etc/printcap, and the output of "ls -l /dev/lp0" and "lsmod" after trying to print.
Created attachment 18 [details] /etc/conf.modules
ls -l /dev/lp0 0 crw-rw---- 1 root daemon 6, 0 May 5 1998 /dev/lp0 Also, how is it you can receive an attachment from a form? Seems insecure. I would much rather have been able to email a reply with the file attached.
Your /etc/conf.modules is broken. It's parport_lowlevel, not parpart_lowlevel. Receiving attachments over a form is some Netscape feature, I think. Netscape transfers the filename you give it to the server. Yes, it is insecure, that's why I didn't ask you to attach your /etc/shadow. ;)
Thank you very much. If I'm going to have a typo pointed out to me I'd rather it happen quickly (and politely) then not. Thanks again.