| 1 |
On Saturday, 8 December 2018 10:36:07 GMT Peter Humphrey wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Friday, 7 December 2018 22:47:06 GMT Peter Humphrey wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On Friday, 7 December 2018 18:46:54 GMT Manuel McLure wrote: |
| 4 |
> > > I'd highly recommend getting a networked printer that supports Port 9100 |
| 5 |
> > > instead of a USB one - this allows you to use the same printer for all |
| 6 |
> > > of |
| 7 |
> > > your systems. |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> > Nonsense. You just don't need a network interface if you don't have one. |
| 10 |
> > This is Linux, not WinBloze. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> That came out a bit sharper than I intended. No offence meant. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
It's a true statement, ethernet is not necessary, if you keep the PC with the |
| 15 |
USB printer running when you need to print. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
I've used both Linux & MSWindows as print servers. If memory serves WinXP was |
| 18 |
able to offer 'Print Services for Unix', their name for LPD, to allow any USB |
| 19 |
printer connected to the WinXP PC to be accessed by Linux clients using CUPS. |
| 20 |
I didn't even have to install Samba on the Linux PCs, vanilla CUPS worked |
| 21 |
fine. Of course the reverse is also true as Peter mentioned. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
-- |
| 24 |
Regards, |
| 25 |
Mick |
Archives