Very Computer

I have a PC running Linux, with a laser printer hooked up to it.  My wife just
bought a Macintosh PowerBook.  I want her to be able to print files from her
PowerBook to my printer.

I'm pretty certain that the first step in enabling her to do this is to get
and install the Columbia Appletalk Protocol (CAP) package with Linux patches
on my machine.  I've seen enough postings about that and pointers to the
software that I'm sure I can find it and install it with little trouble.

What I *don't* know how to do, however, is exactly how to network the
PowerBook to my Linux box.  My original intent was to buy a null-modem cable
to connect the PowerBook serial port to my PC and run SLIP over the null-modem
cable, but (a) I'm having a hell of a time finding someone who actually sells
a DIN8 to DB9 null-modem cable, and (b) I'm no longer 100% convinced that I
will be able to convince the PowerBook to talk Appletalk over a null-modem
SLIP line.

So, I guess it comes down to the following questions:

* Assuming that I already have SLIP server software for my Linux box and I can
install CAP on it as well, is there anything *else* that I need to install?

* Well a null-modem cable work for what I need it to do?

* If so, where can I get a DIN8 to DB9 null-modem cable?  I've tried the local
Micro Center, a local Radio Shack, the computer store at Boston Universtiy,
and MacConnection, and none of them had one.

* Will I need to get or buy any software for the PowerBook that isn't included
with System 7.5?

Please either E-mail any reply to this posting or post it to both
comp.sys.mac.comm and comp.os.linux.networking, because I don't read
comp.sys.mac.comm regularly (although perhaps I'll have to start now that my
wife bought a Mac! :-).

Thanks!

--

They are hard, if not impossible, to find.  The big problem is that there
are several different ways to wire them depending on the kinds of handshaking
that need to be supported.  I just make my own.  My mac serial port summary
document (URL in my .sig) might help you if you want to try making your own.

]                                 and (b) I'm no longer 100% convinced that I
] will be able to convince the PowerBook to talk Appletalk over a null-modem
] SLIP line.

Maybe that's becuase SLIP is a TCP/IP-only protocol.  The only way to do
AppleTalk over SLIP is to embed the AppleTalk packet in IP ones, messy.
You might want to use the multi-protocol PPP instead, though no free PPP
stuff on the Mac side supports AppleTalk over PPP (some commercial ones do).

What kind of printer do you have?  What kind of powerbook is it?  There may
be much better approaches than what you're trying, depending on the equipment.

brian

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~   _______    _____   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
  Brian A. Cole      |_   _  |  |  ___|        visit Brian's Repository
  U. Wisconsin         | | | |__| |___         of Macintosh Information

Apple Macintosh Powerbook 520 8/320
The 520 has the following ports: 1 serial, 1 ethernet, a compact SCSI,
video out, audio in/out

Intel 486 256k external cache, 8/540
The drive is ide, the only perk on the machine is an internal 14.4 modem.

My plan of action was to make an ethernet net between the two
computers.  I would need to buy a card for the PC and a transceiver
for the Mac.  Not exactly cheap, but i would be worthwhile for the
speed.

Is this a viable course of action?  If so, which type of ethernet
should I look at?  10baseT or Thinnet?  Would I make it an appletalk
network or would it be better to run the whole thing under TCP/IP?

Mold me, I am wet clay on this issue.

Kent

###########################################################################
/ Kent Nichols               |   "Insert thought provoking quote here"    \

###########################################################################
                   VI, The Editor Of The New Generation

Kent

###########################################################################
/ Kent Nichols               |   "Insert thought provoking quote here"    \

###########################################################################
                   VI, The Editor Of The New Generation

To exchange data (including postscript files to print), I telnet from the
Mac to Linux, then ftp.  There is apparently a Linux application called
CAP that provides an appletalk interface using the ethernet lin; I havn't
tried to get that running yet.

See the appropriate Linux  HOWTOs (network, ethernet, serial) for help in
setting up the linux ethernet; use MacTcp dialog windows to confiure the
Mac side.  MacTCP Switcher has a good writeup on whats involved with
setting up MacTcp.

Ethernet HW is not a big deal - you just need connectors from your PB to
whatever media you use.  I use 10baseT with a NE2000 clone card on the
Linux box.  You need all the appropriate stuff compiled into the kernel -
I'm current with 1.2.10.

Quote:>See the appropriate Linux  HOWTOs (network, ethernet, serial) for help in
>setting up the linux ethernet; use MacTcp dialog windows to confiure the
>Mac side.  MacTCP Switcher has a good writeup on whats involved with
>setting up MacTcp.

>Ethernet HW is not a big deal - you just need connectors from your PB to
>whatever media you use.  I use 10baseT with a NE2000 clone card on the
>Linux box.  You need all the appropriate stuff compiled into the kernel -
>I'm current with 1.2.10.

#include <std_disclaimer.h>

Dan S.

Quote:> That does sound like it will work, BUT it also sounds like a pain in
> the *to launch fetch (the mac ftp client) every time I want to do
> a file transfer.  Isn't there a way to have the linux box appear as
> a volume on my desk top?  What about that netatalk? and those other
> things from the land down under?  Are they applicable in this type of
> situation?

--
Bret Andrew Martin

It's what I ended up doing, so I guess so :-).

|> If so, which type of ethernet
|> should I look at?  10baseT or Thinnet?

Other people have recommended using 10baseT with a cross-over cable.  That
will work, but what happens when you get an Ethernet-capable printer or some
other third machine that you want to plug into the network :-)?  I decided to
go with thinnet, which is more expandable (i.e., it doesn't force me to buy a
hub if I want to add a third machine).  I found that it was slightly more
expensive than 10baseT, but I think that was just because there was an old Mac
10baseT transceiver in Micro Center that was marked down because it had been
in their inventory for a while, and there was no such thinnet transceiver.

|> Would I make it an appletalk
|> network or would it be better to run the whole thing under TCP/IP?

You'll find it much easier and cheaper to install CAP or netatalk than to have
to transfer everything via FTP or purchase a commercial NFS client for your
Mac.

I can't say anything first-hand about netatalk because I haven't used it, but
I hear that the current beta version of it works out-of-the-box with Linux,
although you have to recompile the kernel with some patches that come with
netatalk (in kernel versions earlier than 1.3.0; I believe that the 1.3.x
kernels have the patches folded into them already).

On the other hand, I use CAP, and while it takes a bit of work to get the
sources into a state that will compile and work on Linux, it's all completely
straightforward.  To find out the details, get this file:

        <URL:ftp://ftp.cam.ov.com/pub/users/jik/jik-linux-cap.doc>

-rich

Well, you either buy a cheap hub, or you do it hubless with EtherWave.
(Yes, you only need one EtherWave to connect three devices, though you
may still need to use that cross-over cable.)

brian
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~   _______    _____   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
  Brian A. Cole      |_   _  |  |  ___|        visit Brian's Repository
  U. Wisconsin         | | | |__| |___         of Macintosh Information

    CAP is not Linux specific. In fact it's usable on a wide variety of Unix platforms. As of kernel revision 1.3.2, there is native support for AppleTalk in the kernel. What this means is that using CAP (Columbia AppleTalk Package) and UAR (Unix AppleTalk Router) you can setup a Phase 2 Ethertalk network. Just follow the directions and away you go!

   Cheers,
   Bruce.
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Bruce Thompson                  | "Never put off till tomorrow what
PIE Developer Information Group |  you can comfortably put off till
Apple Computer Inc.             |  next week."
                                |    -- Unknown
Usual Disclaimers Apply         |

:     CAP is not Linux specific. In fact it's usable on a wide variety of Unix platforms. As of kernel revision 1.3.2, there is native support for AppleTalk in the kernel. What this means is that using CAP (Columbia AppleTalk Package) and UAR (Unix AppleTalk Router) you can setup a Phase 2 Ethertalk network. Just follow the directions and away you go!

I'm not a Mac user myself, but I've heard there is another
program suite called Netatalk, also ported for Linux, that
provides the same connectivity (i think) as CAP.  It's just
been through an upgrade, so may be worth checking out as well.

--
Frank G Bennett, Jr
Law Department, SOAS, London
Tel: (071)323-6351

WWW: http://rumple.soas.ac.uk/~fbennett/

1) I suggest you learn how to make your news reader/poster wrap lines at 80
columns or less.  If you don't understand why this is a good idea, spend some
time reading news.announce.newusers.

2) As far as I know, CAP doesn't know about the AppleTalk support in the
Kernel, and therefore doesn't use it; instead, CAP includes its own user-level
EtherTalk implementation.  If you want to take advantage of the AppleTalk code
in the 1.3 kernel, you need to use netatalk instead of CAP.

I'll say again what I've said in previous postings about this -- I don't have
any first-hand experience with netatalk, so I can't say if it's better or worse
than CAP.  On the other hand, it does use the built-in Linux AppleTalk
support, if you're willing to run a 1.3 kernel.  Furthermore, given what I
know about the CAP code from the debugging I had to do in order to make it
work in my environment, I can assure you that it would be difficult for the
netatalk code to be *worse* than the CAP code :-).

--