I want to post a followup for this. I solved it and it was not a Samba issue.
It was to do with the printer in question (the instance installed on the
user's computer) was using a "local port" called \\myserver\printername,
rather than the "no visible port" setting that Windows 2000 usually ha
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Misty Stanley-Jones wrote:
| Well this problem is not as isolated as first believed. I also have
some XP
| users who can't see the print jobs. Everyone can _print_, they just
cannot
| monitor or cancel any jobs, even their own.
The conditions we test
Well this problem is not as isolated as first believed. I also have some XP
users who can't see the print jobs. Everyone can _print_, they just cannot
monitor or cancel any jobs, even their own.
Could it be because of the permissions of the print jobs:
-rw--- 1 nobody nobody53963
On Tuesday 04 January 2005 16:54, John H Terpstra wrote:
>
> Is the 10th user a manager of the "printer operators" group?
No. Nobody is.
>
> At "log level = 5" what do the logs for that 10th machine show has
> happened. I suspect you will find your answer there.
>
> log level = 5
> m
On Tuesday 04 January 2005 14:43, Misty Stanley-Jones wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've got one printer on our network where the drivers have to be installed
> locally. This has been a pain in the butt so far, and today is no
> different. I've got 10 users using this printer on Windows 2000. They are
> a
Hi all,
I've got one printer on our network where the drivers have to be installed
locally. This has been a pain in the butt so far, and today is no different.
I've got 10 users using this printer on Windows 2000. They are all
administrators on their local machines. I installed the printer
