Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [SUSE Linux Users] No Access to Printers Under SuSE v10.1

Expand Messages
  • K. S.
    ... Haha, good catch - true, they may not be not real files (did I just imagine them?) but you can certainly read and write them. Note, a newer way to
    Message 1 of 18 , May 31 8:15 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      Georgina Joyce wrote:
      > On Sat, May 27, 2006 at 03:01:03PM +0100, Ken Hough wrote:
      >> BTW, 'files' which appear under /proc are not real files and cannot be
      >> modified.
      > This is not true. Not set up a new system and needed to enable ip forwarding?
      >
      > echo 1 >/proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward

      Haha, good catch - true, they may not be not "real" files (did I just imagine
      them?) but you can certainly read and write them.

      Note, a newer way to accomplish the above is:

      sysctl -w net.ipv4.ip_forward=1

      Or make that adjustment in the GUI tool of your choice (e.g. in yast,
      system->powertweak->networking->ip)


      e
    • Ken Hough
      ... I stand (partially) corrected. It is not possible to write directly into these files . I ve just checked, using cpuinfo as an example. Even though it s
      Message 2 of 18 , Jun 1, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Georgina Joyce wrote:

        >On Sat, May 27, 2006 at 03:01:03PM +0100, Ken Hough wrote:
        >
        >
        >>BTW, 'files' which appear under /proc are not real files and cannot be
        >>modified.
        >>
        >>
        >This is not true. Not set up a new system and needed to enable ip forwarding?
        >
        >echo 1 >/proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward
        >
        >Gena
        >
        >
        I stand (partially) corrected. It is not possible to write directly into
        these 'files'. I've just checked, using 'cpuinfo' as an example. Even
        though it's possible to apparently add wrire access (via chmod), it's
        still not possible to write directly into this 'file'.

        Ken Hough

        >>Ken Hough
        >>
        >>Roland Behunin wrote:
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >>>Hi Ken,
        >>>
        >>>Both my printers had usb connections, so this was not a concern for me.
        >>>Also, Belkin makes a usb - lpt adapter, and I have used it on a couple of
        >>>printers in the past.
        >>>
        >>>However, I am now setting up a computer to use.. as for audio storage, and
        >>>I think I will stick a printer on the thing to print labels for bottles of
        >>>mead.
        >>>
        >>>Anyway, I now have a bit of interest in this... however, I think I have the
        >>>usb to lpt adapter around here someplace for myself to use if you are
        >>>unable to figure this out.
        >>>
        >>>I would start where you have started and look at the entries for the system
        >>>that is working. Then attempt putting those lines into the same place in
        >>>a system that is not working.
        >>>
        >>>You may have to change the address of the lpt port so it matches the new
        >>>system.
        >>>
        >>>That would be my first thought on what to attempt.
        >>>
        >>>roland
        >>>
        >>>On Saturday 27 May 2006 01:35, Ken Hough wrote:
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>>Harold,
        >>>>
        >>>>Likewise! Ifind it hard to believe that SUSE would release distros with
        >>>>such a serious problem.
        >>>>
        >>>>I've been doing a bit of investigation which might have discovered
        >>>>something significant.
        >>>>
        >>>>Presently, I have two installations of SuSE v10.1 (on a spare laptop
        >>>>hard drive and on an Athlon 2200 box), one SuSE v10.0 installation (on
        >>>>an Athlon 1600 box) and a SuSE v9.1 installationn on a laptop hard
        >>>>drive. Printing works on the laptop v9.1 installation and used to work
        >>>>on v9.1 installations which resided to be on the two Athlon boxes.
        >>>>
        >>>>I took a look at /proc/ioports on all of these systems. On the v9.1
        >>>>installation (which works) there is a single entry for 'parport0' at
        >>>>the correct location as shown in the bios utility (ie 03bc-03be --
        >>>>laptop PC).
        >>>>
        >>>>In all of the other cases which do not work (ie v10.0 and v10.1), there
        >>>>are two entries for 'parport0'. The first entry is for the correct
        >>>>location as per the bios utility (0378-037a in both cases). However, in
        >>>>all of these installations, there is also a second entry for 'parport0'
        >>>>at 0778-077a. Is this normal or could this be why there is a problem
        >>>>with v10.0 and v10.1?
        >>>>
        >>>>If this is the problem, how do I correct it?
        >>>>
        >>>>Ken Hough
        >>>>
        >>>>
        >>>>
        >>>>
        >>>>
        >>>>SPONSORED LINKS
        >>>>Linux software Linux operating system Suse linux
        >>>> Hosting linux unix web Unix operating system Unix vs linux
        >>>>
        >>>>
        >>>>YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
        >>>>
        >>>>
        >>>>Visit your group "suselinuxusers" on the web.
        >>>>
        >>>>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        >>>>suselinuxusers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        >>>>
        >>>>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
        >>>>
        >>>>
        >>>>
        >>>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>Yahoo! Groups Links
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >>Yahoo! Groups Links
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >---end quoted text---
        >
        >
        >
      • K. S.
        ... You can t write to cpuinfo because there is no reason, therefore no allowance for, writing to that field. If it was writeable it would have no value since
        Message 3 of 18 , Jun 1, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          Ken Hough wrote:

          > I stand (partially) corrected. It is not possible to write directly into
          > these 'files'. I've just checked, using 'cpuinfo' as an example. Even
          > though it's possible to apparently add wrire access (via chmod), it's
          > still not possible to write directly into this 'file'.

          You can't write to cpuinfo because there is no reason, therefore no allowance
          for, writing to that field. If it was writeable it would have no value since
          it would be meaningless. You can't e.g. add CPUs by writing to /proc.

          On the other hand there are several hundred kernel parameters which you *can*
          change by writing to /proc, and Georgina gave you one very clear example.

          This is an example of how linux compares to old school unix - on solaris, to
          change such values, you edit /etc/system and reboot. On hpux, you change the
          kernel parameter in sam, recompile the kernel and reboot. Yikes.

          In linux, you just write the desired value to the appropriate location in
          /proc, (or preferably issue a sysctl command to do the same thing) and the
          change is immediately effective.

          e
        • Ken Hough
          ... Clearly so. I chose that randomly just to try. ... I stand (FULLY) corrected. Thanks. I ve learned something. Ken Hough
          Message 4 of 18 , Jun 1, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            K. S. wrote:

            >Ken Hough wrote:
            >
            >
            >
            >>I stand (partially) corrected. It is not possible to write directly into
            >>these 'files'. I've just checked, using 'cpuinfo' as an example. Even
            >>though it's possible to apparently add wrire access (via chmod), it's
            >>still not possible to write directly into this 'file'.
            >>
            >>
            >
            >You can't write to cpuinfo because there is no reason, therefore no allowance
            >for, writing to that field. If it was writeable it would have no value since
            >it would be meaningless. You can't e.g. add CPUs by writing to /proc.
            >
            >
            Clearly so.

            I chose that randomly just to try.

            >On the other hand there are several hundred kernel parameters which you *can*
            >change by writing to /proc, and Georgina gave you one very clear example.
            >
            >This is an example of how linux compares to old school unix - on solaris, to
            >change such values, you edit /etc/system and reboot. On hpux, you change the
            >kernel parameter in sam, recompile the kernel and reboot. Yikes.
            >
            >In linux, you just write the desired value to the appropriate location in
            >/proc, (or preferably issue a sysctl command to do the same thing) and the
            >change is immediately effective.
            >
            >e
            >
            >
            >
            I stand (FULLY) corrected. Thanks. I've learned something.

            Ken Hough
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.