I note that an entry for 'Printer support' appears in the roadmap for version 'never'.  I'm not sure what is meant by 'Printer support', but I would argue a case for allowing unRAID to act as a network print server.

 

As an example of the usefulness of this, I have recently added a cheap colour laser (Samsung CLP-315 - usb interface only), as a temporary solution to being unable to source toner for my LJ3800dtn.  At the moment I have the Samsung connected to, and shared by, an ubuntu desktop machine.  However, it does mean that the desktop machine has to left running in order that the printer be accessible to other clients.

 

Now, I already have a machine that is left running 24/7, and it has ten unused usb ports - wouldn't it be handy to be able to hang my printer(s) off the unRAID server?

 

What would be the overheads of adding printer support?  Would this require support to be compiled into the kernel, or could it all be achieved as an add-on package?

I note that an entry for 'Printer support' appears in the roadmap for version 'never'.  I'm not sure what is meant by 'Printer support', but I would argue a case for allowing unRAID to act as a network print server.

 

As an example of the usefulness of this, I have recently added a cheap colour laser (Samsung CLP-315 - usb interface only), as a temporary solution to being unable to source toner for my LJ3800dtn.  At the moment I have the Samsung connected to, and shared by, an ubuntu desktop machine.  However, it does mean that the desktop machine has to left running in order that the printer be accessible to other clients.

 

Now, I already have a machine that is left running 24/7, and it has ten unused usb ports - wouldn't it be handy to be able to hang my printer(s) off the unRAID server?

 

What would be the overheads of adding printer support?  Would this require support to be compiled into the kernel, or could it all be achieved as an add-on package?

An add-on package already exists... Look at the p910nd package in the unMENU package manager.  It is an implementation of the HP jet-direct protocol.  There is no spooling of files, and no banner pages, and no "printcap" support, but if your printer driver can output to a "RAW" network device it will work.   The overhead of a full spooling printer server is HUGE.  I do not see that unless you install it yourself.    The p910nd driver is tiny and has nearly no overhead.

An add-on package already exists... Look at the p910nd package in the unMENU package manager.

 

Excellent - that is exactly what I needed .... how did I manage to overlook it?

 

I've already printed from my main desktop machine ... I just have to go around the other machines to change the printer port.

 

Many thanks, Joe!

An add-on package already exists... Look at the p910nd package in the unMENU package manager.

 

Excellent - that is exactly what I needed .... how did I manage to overlook it?

 

I've already printed from my main desktop machine ... I just have to go around the other machines to change the printer port.

 

Many thanks, Joe!

No problem...  Interestingly, it does require a small amount of support from the kernel, as it must have the USB printer support enabled.  thankfully, Tom added that a while ago.

 

Glad the install went smoothly for you.  The package manager sure makes it simple, even when having to download and compile the p910nd driver program from sourceforge.

 

Joe L.

An add-on package already exists... Look at the p910nd package in the unMENU package manager.

 

Excellent - that is exactly what I needed .... how did I manage to overlook it?

 

I've already printed from my main desktop machine ... I just have to go around the other machines to change the printer port.

 

Many thanks, Joe!

No problem...  Interestingly, it does require a small amount of support from the kernel, as it must have the USB printer support enabled.  thankfully, Tom added that a while ago.

 

Glad the install went smoothly for you.  The package manager sure makes it simple, even when having to download and compile the p910nd driver program from sourceforge.

 

Joe L.

 

I just checked the 5.0b5 notes and it looks like he may have removed the above mentioned USB printer support.  Have a look at it and if you come to the same conclusion we probably need to send Tom an email or something.

 

I have a printer hooked up to my unRAID server (via parallel all be it) but I do use the p90nd package quite a bit.

An add-on package already exists... Look at the p910nd package in the unMENU package manager.

 

Excellent - that is exactly what I needed .... how did I manage to overlook it?

 

I've already printed from my main desktop machine ... I just have to go around the other machines to change the printer port.

 

Many thanks, Joe!

No problem...  Interestingly, it does require a small amount of support from the kernel, as it must have the USB printer support enabled.  thankfully, Tom added that a while ago.

 

Glad the install went smoothly for you.  The package manager sure makes it simple, even when having to download and compile the p910nd driver program from sourceforge.

 

Joe L.

 

I just checked the 5.0b5 notes and it looks like he may have removed the above mentioned USB printer support.  Have a look at it and if you come to the same conclusion we probably need to send Tom an email or something.

 

I have a printer hooked up to my unRAID server (via parallel all be it) but I do use the p90nd package quite a bit.

Already did send Tom a note, as soon as I saw the release note, and Tom wrote back it (USB printer support) would not be removed.

 

Our PM conversation went like this  (hopefully Tom won't mind if I make this public.):

There are quite a number of us using the USB printer support. 

(We are using the p910nd driver, which is a raw driver talking directly to the USB port (typically /dev/lp1)

 

The p910nd driver is a tiny self-contained "raw" driver that works like the old HP JetDirect driver.

unMENUs package manager actually downloads the source from

http://sourceforge.net/projects/p910nd/

and then compiles and installs it.  it

 

It simply reads from the defined port (typically 9100 through 9103) and communicates with the printer, typically on /dev/usb0, or /dev/lp0 depending on if it is a parallel or USB printer.

 

The driver does no spooling, and needs no printcap type configuration.  It simply sends what the windows printer driver creates to the printer.

 

Please do not remove the USB printing support in the kernel.  You put it there because it was requested.  You do not need any other support items in the bin directories, but we do need the usb device to be detected as a printer when it is.

 

Joe

 

Yeah, ok.  I was reviewing the USB support, looking why USB3.0 doesn't work, and saw this lone printer enabled.... Once in a while during kernel upgrades some things "sneak" into the .config file & I thought this might be one of them.

I'll restore this support before release of -beta5.

Yup, just saw that myself.  I looked at it yesterday at some point and saw it listed in there but kind of glanced over it.  I just this second went back through and see that the little blurb able USB printer support being removed was taken out and the 5.0b5 wiki entry updated.

 

Good to see someone is on top of things Joe L.

I just checked the 5.0b5 notes and it looks like he may have removed the above mentioned USB printer support.  Have a look at it and if you come to the same conclusion we probably need to send Tom an email or something.

 

This is what I was afraid of in the beginning, but hoped wouldn't happen when Tom mentioned opening a developer's forum.  You guys seem to be on the inside now of a circle that is not updated for others.  There is no mention of v5b5 in the public Roadmap, nor any indication that beta 4 has even been started.  While I understand the need to have "closed door" sessions for development, it creates a dangerous "elitist" atmosphere that you guys have to try to avoid.  The rest of us may not be skilled enough to participate, but keeping the Roadmap updated with what is really going on will reduce confusion significantly.

I just checked the 5.0b5 notes and it looks like he may have removed the above mentioned USB printer support.  Have a look at it and if you come to the same conclusion we probably need to send Tom an email or something.

 

This is what I was afraid of in the beginning, but hoped wouldn't happen when Tom mentioned opening a developer's forum.  You guys seem to be on the inside now of a circle that is not updated for others.  There is no mention of v5b5 in the public Roadmap, nor any indication that beta 4 has even been started.  While I understand the need to have "closed door" sessions for development, it creates a dangerous "elitist" atmosphere that you guys have to try to avoid.  The rest of us may not be skilled enough to participate, but keeping the Roadmap updated with what is really going on will reduce confusion significantly.

I agree, Tom is remiss in not keeping the roadmap up to date.  I do not think he anticipated the immediate need for 5.0b5, but 5.0b4 is so buggy on some motherboards it is shifting his priorities. 5.0b5 has turned out to be a huge change in the approach for unRAID probably for the better.  We'll see soon enough.

 

There is no closed door I know of, the message I copied was in a PM in response to one I sent to him.

I agree, Tom is remiss in not keeping the roadmap up to date.  I do not think he anticipated the immediate need for 5.0b5, but 5.0b4 is so buggy on some motherboards it is shifting his priorities. 5.0b5 has turned out to be a huge change in the approach for unRAID probably for the better.

 

Thanks Joe.  I have no doubt the rapid movement through the betas is for the betterment of the application.  But in the brave new world of roadmapping that Tom has started, you have to change some of your bad habits or else the much desired transparency is lost, and no one will trust it.  Perhaps some of the more tenacious archival types such as Rob could help him keep his documentation current.

 

There is no closed door I know of, the message I copied was in a PM in response to one I sent to him.

 

I was referring to this comment in the first post of the "Roadmap" thread:

In the future this site will also host community-contributed Plugins and a separate Developer's Forum.

 

I read that to mean a smaller forum for devs only.  Did he mean this Version 5 Forum that we're all using?

I read that to mean a smaller forum for devs only.  Did he mean this Version 5 Forum that we're all using?

I know of no other forum.   so, yes, I think he means the version 5 forum you see here.

 

As I said, there is forum just for the moderators... It is mostly threads about spammers, movement of topics to appropriate threads, more spammers, appropriateness of stickies, etc.

 

Right now, version 5.0beta5 is not starting the array for many who try it.  I suspect a 5.0beta6 soon to fix a segmentation fault.

 

Joe L.