My printer just stopped working. I was successfully able to use the built in scanner (using MS paint). When I tell it to print things, they are sent to the queue, but don't even reach the status of spooling. Instead, the column titled "status" is just blank.
Background stuff: The computer is a fourish year old desktop running Vista. The printer is physically wired to the computer. The printer is a HP Photosmart C5180. The printer has given me numerous problems in the past including this: and deleting all its drivers during an attempt to update. Following the incident with the drivers, the printer made me register it online with HP which required certain information I didn't have. Specifically the date it was purchased and the name of the person who bought it (either of my parents could have done it). The problem is pretty recent (last two days or so) and was first noticed when my dad tried to print a medical certification certificate via firefox. However, deleting that from the queue didn't solve the problem.
Stuff I've tried: Turning the printer off and on Rebooting the computer Disconnecting and reconnecting the printer
Edit: I downloaded a diagnostic tool from HP's site which told me that my computer believed that it had 3 printers installed. Using the tool, I figured out which one was real, set that to be my default, and am now happily printing stuff.
Hi everyone, first time poster here! I'm not sure if this is the right place, but I didn't want to start a whole thread. I've decided to stop trying to play games on my 5 year old mac and build myself a windows desktop; however I have no experience of anything like this, short of switching out an old hard drive. Being in the UK I can't use Newegg (D:) so I've found a site that seems similar in the UK and have spent an evening finding most of the components. If I've made a stupid mistake, try to be nice So far I've got: CPU Motherboard (I have no idea what to look for in a motherboard, I will happily upgrade this if necessary) RAM Hard drive DVD RW So I just need the GPU, case and PSU - I think. I was hoping you could point out any mistakes I've made and possibly recommend a GPU that will keep me within budget, as I really have no idea what's worth getting and google hasn't been kind to me XD Also, will I need a case fan?
Thanks a lot for your help! A guy on another forum recommended me scrapping my build and going for this and this. Is there any reason to go with this other than price? Basically I'm worried that my components won't work together (the motherboard in particular, as I just chose the cheapest I could find) and the ones he's suggested will. Sorry to carry on asking after you've already answered my question, don't feel obligated to respond
It looks like the motherboard you chose will work with the other components, it just doesn't have any extras like USB3 SATA 6gbps or extra pci-e slots. It looks like the motherboard, hard drive, and RAM he chose are better than what you picked, but the GPU and CPU are worse.
Would it be a good idea to use the GPU you suggested with his build? I'd have thought the CPU he's got would be powerful enough for what I'm wanting to do, but having the better GPU would be really nice, especially at only £40 more - I take it that the GPU would still be noticeably better without the faster CPU?
OK, what the funk has happened here, and how do I reproduce it: Note the symbolic link "bin" which links back on itself. However, it is also a functioning directory. This happened when installing two softwares in the same directory, but before I go and look through the Makefiles to figure out how it happened, I thought I'd ask here as there are *nix gurus in attendance.
I have tried to replicate this by variously creating directories and circular symbolic links, renaming and moving them, etc. etc., but nothing recreates the phenomenon of having a circular link that is also a directory.
Actually, it doesn't look like it's a link to itself, unless there's a copy/paste mistake here. The path to the link is /Users/ruppell/Documents/Code/calchep_3.0/Timo/bin, whereas the link points to /Users/ruppell/Documents/Code/calchep_3.0/bin . Note that there is no "Timo" in the second path. Try to cd to /Users/ruppell/Documents/Code/calchep_3.0/ and see if there's both a "bin" and "Timo" directory there.
Actually, it doesn't look like it's a link to itself, unless there's a copy/paste mistake here. The path to the link is /Users/ruppell/Documents/Code/calchep_3.0/Timo/bin, whereas the link points to /Users/ruppell/Documents/Code/calchep_3.0/bin . Note that there is no "Timo" in the second path. Try to cd to /Users/ruppell/Documents/Code/calchep_3.0/ and see if there's both a "bin" and "Timo" directory there.
I didn't notice at first either. Then, after a couple quick tests on my own Mac to see if it was some weird OS X-specific behavior with regard to links (I already know that OS X handles hard links differently than other Unixes), I somehow noticed the real issue. Oh well, brain farts happen to all of us from time to time.
I already know that OS X handles hard links differently than other Unixes
Please elaborate on this. I want to add to my OSX is not standard UNIX arsenal.
Basically, OS X allows you to have hard links to directories, something other Unixes typically avoid. This started with 10.5 (Leopard) as their Time Machine backup facility requires hard links to directories for some reason I haven't bothered to look up/refresh my memory on.
OSX has a legit UNIX certification, your argument is invalid. UNIX 03, full SUS compliance.
Very true. Most (all?) Linuxes don't have any Unix certification, so Linux is not a standard Unix. It may be one of the most popular Unixes, but it's not standard.
OSX has a legit UNIX certification, your argument is invalid. UNIX 03, full SUS compliance.
Very true. Most (all?) Linuxes don't have any Unix certification, so Linux is not a standard Unix. It may be one of the most popular Unixes, but it's not standard.
I wasn't aware that there was a such thing as an official standard of what constitutes a standard UNIX. I was using the word standard in a colloquial sense in that OSX behaves differently than every other *NIX.
I wasn't aware that there was a such thing as an official standard of what constitutes a standard UNIX. I was using the word standard in a colloquial sense in that OSX behaves differently than every other *NIX.
There is a standard out there, the Single UNIX Specification. However, OS X does not behave any more differently from any other *NIX than anything else. Your *NIX knowledge, as far as I can determine, appears to be limited to Linux, which actually deviates more from the other *NIXes than OS X does, although admittedly Linux tends to be a superset of what's needed to be a certified *NIX.
I wasn't aware that there was a such thing as an official standard of what constitutes a standard UNIX. I was using the word standard in a colloquial sense in that OSX behaves differently than every other *NIX.
The Single UNIX Specification outlines how UNIX compliant systems behave. OS X doesn't behave differently than all every other *NIX. More accurately, Linux behaves differently than all other UNIX compliant systems.
The point is that from the perspective of actually using the system, OSX does many things differently. Things like having applications in .app folders and launchctl and the other things mentioned previously.
They all do things differently. OS X and Solaris are two very different beasts, but they both UNIX 03. And they'll be different from AIX and HP/UX, which are also UNIX 03.
The point is that from the perspective of actually using the system, OSX does many things differently. Things like having applications in .app folders and launchctl and the other things mentioned previously.
True, but then again, every Unix does different things differently for that matter. Most Unixes don't use any sort of package managers, for example, and those that do don't use RPMs or DEBs. Package management is pretty much a Linux-only thing, though a few Unixes (such as OpenSolaris) have recently started coming up with their own package managers that use their own formats.
If we talk about launchctl/launchd, Upstart is a similar feature that only Linux uses. No other *NIX uses it as they typically stick to the old SysV or BSD-init techniques.
These are just a couple of the areas where OS X and Linux typically differ from other Unixes aren't areas that are specified by the Unix standard. In fact, vendors are allowed to do whatever they want in these respective areas. The Unix standard basically only specifies what the standard shell is (oh, and it's not bash, btw), the standard command set, and the standard APIs and system calls. Administrative stuff, such as this, is left up to the vendor's discretion.
They are all still different operating systems after all.
Very, very true. At a prior job, I worked on a product that had a single source base that ran on multiple versions of Unix. While most of the code worked just fine without modification, there were a few areas where we had to abstract away the differences between, oh, say Solaris and HP/UX (or AIX, Tru64, NCR SysV R4, eventually Linux, etc...). They were all Unixes and even standard Unixes, but they differed in all sorts of subtle ways.
Yes, Solaris, Ubuntu, Red Hat, BSD, AIX, etc. all have their differences. The point is that despite these differences, the difference for the user is often relatively small. Most open source programs just ./configure; make; make install just fine across the board. But on OSX you always need to end up doing some extra weird different thing than you don't need to do on the others despite their differences.
Comments
Background stuff:
The computer is a fourish year old desktop running Vista.
The printer is physically wired to the computer.
The printer is a HP Photosmart C5180.
The printer has given me numerous problems in the past including this:
and deleting all its drivers during an attempt to update.
Following the incident with the drivers, the printer made me register it online with HP which required certain information I didn't have. Specifically the date it was purchased and the name of the person who bought it (either of my parents could have done it).
The problem is pretty recent (last two days or so) and was first noticed when my dad tried to print a medical certification certificate via firefox. However, deleting that from the queue didn't solve the problem.
Stuff I've tried:
Turning the printer off and on
Rebooting the computer
Disconnecting and reconnecting the printer
Edit: I downloaded a diagnostic tool from HP's site which told me that my computer believed that it had 3 printers installed. Using the tool, I figured out which one was real, set that to be my default, and am now happily printing stuff.
I'm not sure if this is the right place, but I didn't want to start a whole thread.
I've decided to stop trying to play games on my 5 year old mac and build myself a windows desktop; however I have no experience of anything like this, short of switching out an old hard drive. Being in the UK I can't use Newegg (D:) so I've found a site that seems similar in the UK and have spent an evening finding most of the components. If I've made a stupid mistake, try to be nice
So far I've got:
CPU
Motherboard (I have no idea what to look for in a motherboard, I will happily upgrade this if necessary)
RAM
Hard drive
DVD RW
So I just need the GPU, case and PSU - I think. I was hoping you could point out any mistakes I've made and possibly recommend a GPU that will keep me within budget, as I really have no idea what's worth getting and google hasn't been kind to me XD
Also, will I need a case fan?
A guy on another forum recommended me scrapping my build and going for this and this. Is there any reason to go with this other than price? Basically I'm worried that my components won't work together (the motherboard in particular, as I just chose the cheapest I could find) and the ones he's suggested will. Sorry to carry on asking after you've already answered my question, don't feel obligated to respond
Note the symbolic link "bin" which links back on itself. However, it is also a functioning directory. This happened when installing two softwares in the same directory, but before I go and look through the Makefiles to figure out how it happened, I thought I'd ask here as there are *nix gurus in attendance.
I have tried to replicate this by variously creating directories and circular symbolic links, renaming and moving them, etc. etc., but nothing recreates the phenomenon of having a circular link that is also a directory.
I'm stumped.
EDIT: Ninja'd by Lou.
If we talk about launchctl/launchd, Upstart is a similar feature that only Linux uses. No other *NIX uses it as they typically stick to the old SysV or BSD-init techniques.
These are just a couple of the areas where OS X and Linux typically differ from other Unixes aren't areas that are specified by the Unix standard. In fact, vendors are allowed to do whatever they want in these respective areas. The Unix standard basically only specifies what the standard shell is (oh, and it's not bash, btw), the standard command set, and the standard APIs and system calls. Administrative stuff, such as this, is left up to the vendor's discretion.