From owner-freebsd-questions Tue Jun 6 14: 1:18 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from fw.wintelcom.net (ns1.wintelcom.net [209.1.153.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04C3337BAD1 for ; Tue, 6 Jun 2000 14:01:14 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from bright@fw.wintelcom.net) Received: (from bright@localhost) by fw.wintelcom.net (8.10.0/8.10.0) id e56L1AC05163; Tue, 6 Jun 2000 14:01:10 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2000 14:01:10 -0700 From: Alfred Perlstein To: Chris Wasser Cc: "freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG" Subject: Re: Multiple LPT Ports: Second Posting Message-ID: <20000606140110.P17973@fw.wintelcom.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: ; from cwasser@v-wave.com on Tue, Jun 06, 2000 at 02:41:50PM -0600 Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG * Chris Wasser [000606 13:42] wrote: > I'll try that (in all certainty, I should have realized > this long ago) however, I do have a problem with > parallel ports under BSD regardless as it is, it would > seem that interrupt-mode doesn't play nicely with any of > the ports I've tried (from 486-class all the way to > Athlon) and the ports have to be put into polling mode > otherwise they print so slowly, I can get out and walk > faster so-to-speak. I've read somewhere that EPP mode > produces the best results for printing under BSD, I've > gone this route with onboard ports trying interrupt-mode > but produces the same result. this reeks of an IRQ misassignment. -Alfred To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message