Outsmarting DOS C compiler to print to USB printer -- use DOS interrupt?

Discussion in 'C Programming' started by tomhr, Jan 10, 2006.

  1. tomhr

    tomhr Guest

    I have a Borland Turbo C++ compiler (though I never use the "plus-plus"
    part), copyright 1990. I use this compiler to write simple programs,
    one of which I am quite dependent on.

    A month ago, my parallel-port-output printer died, and I got a Samsung
    printer that takes info from the USB port. Every time I go into DOS
    mode and try to send something to that printer, whether from a command
    line ("dir>prn"), or from one of my programs, I get an error message.

    It occured to me that if I called an interrupt from my DOS program,
    that's how I could send characters to my USB printer. Is this possible,
    and what interrupt do I use? To give an example, Interrupt 17h,
    Function 00h is the (no longer useful) interrupt that sends a character
    to the parallel port.
    tomhr, Jan 10, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. tomhr said:

    > It occured to me that if I called an interrupt from my DOS program,
    > that's how I could send characters to my USB printer. Is this possible,
    > and what interrupt do I use? To give an example, Interrupt 17h,
    > Function 00h is the (no longer useful) interrupt that sends a character
    > to the parallel port.


    It may well be possible, but your best bet of finding out would be over in
    comp.os.msdos.programmer - where they specialise in this kind of thing.

    --
    Richard Heathfield
    "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
    http://www.cpax.org.uk
    email: rjh at above domain (but drop the www, obviously)
    Richard Heathfield, Jan 10, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. tomhr

    Noway2 Guest

    It should (actually I am very certain that it is) possible to get USB
    to function under dos, but based on my experience with USB (and dos) I
    highly doubt that it will be as simple as calling an interrupt. The
    problem is that you need a USB driver for dos and on top of that the
    driver needs to know how to handle the type of device that you are
    trying to communicate with.

    If you are feeling adventurous, it may be possible to access the USB
    host controller that is in the PC and you could then write a driver for
    it. I also believe that someone (I forget who) did write a USB driver
    for DOS, which may serve your needs. I stumbled across references to
    this USB driver but I never downloaded it.
    Noway2, Jan 10, 2006
    #3
  4. tomhr

    Guest

    tomhr wrote:
    > I have a Borland Turbo C++ compiler (though I never use the "plus-plus"
    > part), copyright 1990. I use this compiler to write simple programs,
    > one of which I am quite dependent on.
    >
    > A month ago, my parallel-port-output printer died, and I got a Samsung
    > printer that takes info from the USB port. Every time I go into DOS
    > mode and try to send something to that printer, whether from a command
    > line ("dir>prn"), or from one of my programs, I get an error message.
    >
    > It occured to me that if I called an interrupt from my DOS program,
    > that's how I could send characters to my USB printer. Is this possible,
    > and what interrupt do I use? To give an example, Interrupt 17h,
    > Function 00h is the (no longer useful) interrupt that sends a character
    > to the parallel port.


    I assume from "dos mode" and "usb" that you're running Windows.
    I also assume that you have a Windows driver for the usb printer.

    Try this.

    Create a sharename for the printer.

    [control panel/printers/right click/properties/sharing]

    Start a dos command window.

    C:/>net use \\mypc\printersharename LPT1:

    (You can share your own resources with yourself.)

    That will set the dos lpt1: printer hook to the windows usb driver.
    , Jan 10, 2006
    #4
  5. Re: Outsmarting DOS C compiler to print to USB printer -- use DOSinterrupt?

    "" <> writes:
    [...]
    > I assume from "dos mode" and "usb" that you're running Windows.
    > I also assume that you have a Windows driver for the usb printer.
    >
    > Try this.
    >
    > Create a sharename for the printer.
    >
    > [control panel/printers/right click/properties/sharing]
    >
    > Start a dos command window.
    >
    > C:/>net use \\mypc\printersharename LPT1:
    >
    > (You can share your own resources with yourself.)
    >
    > That will set the dos lpt1: printer hook to the windows usb driver.


    The majority of us here have no idea whether that's correct. It could
    be exactly the right solution, or it could have some subtle flaw
    that's going to bite the user in an anatomically inconvenient location
    at the worst possible moment.

    That's why we encourage people to take system-specific discussions to
    system-specific newsgroups. There are plenty of newsgroups that
    discuss Windows and/or DOS programming. This isn't one of them.

    --
    Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
    San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
    We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.
    Keith Thompson, Jan 10, 2006
    #5
  6. tomhr

    Guest

    Keith Thompson wrote:
    > "" <> writes:
    > [...]
    > > I assume from "dos mode" and "usb" that you're running Windows.
    > > I also assume that you have a Windows driver for the usb printer.
    > >
    > > Try this.
    > >
    > > Create a sharename for the printer.
    > >
    > > [control panel/printers/right click/properties/sharing]
    > >
    > > Start a dos command window.
    > >
    > > C:/>net use \\mypc\printersharename LPT1:
    > >
    > > (You can share your own resources with yourself.)
    > >
    > > That will set the dos lpt1: printer hook to the windows usb driver.

    >
    > The majority of us here have no idea whether that's correct.


    And I have no way of testing it.

    > It could be exactly the right solution,


    It has been known to work in similar cases.

    > or it could have some subtle flaw
    > that's going to bite the user in an anatomically inconvenient location
    > at the worst possible moment.


    More likely it simply won't work at all, or it will work when he
    does dir>prn but fail when his application tries to print because
    the application bypasses the OS hook.

    >
    > That's why we encourage people to take system-specific discussions to
    > system-specific newsgroups. There are plenty of newsgroups that
    > discuss Windows and/or DOS programming. This isn't one of them.


    And the person to scold is the OP. What kind of spiteful person
    withholds an answer from some poor slob simply because his
    post was off-topic? Would you ask a drowning person to fill out
    a form before throwing him a life preserver?

    >
    > --
    > Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
    > San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
    > We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.
    , Jan 10, 2006
    #6
  7. Re: Outsmarting DOS C compiler to print to USB printer -- use DOSinterrupt?

    "" <> writes:
    > Keith Thompson wrote:

    [snip]
    >> That's why we encourage people to take system-specific discussions to
    >> system-specific newsgroups. There are plenty of newsgroups that
    >> discuss Windows and/or DOS programming. This isn't one of them.

    >
    > And the person to scold is the OP. What kind of spiteful person
    > withholds an answer from some poor slob simply because his
    > post was off-topic? Would you ask a drowning person to fill out
    > a form before throwing him a life preserver?


    The OP may or may not deserve to be scolded. The person who posted a
    detailed off-topic answer certainly does.

    Drowning people don't post to Usenet; this wasn't a life-and-death
    emergency. The OP asked for help. The best way to provide that help
    is to redirect him to a newsgroup where the regulars actually know
    something about the topic. If you happen to have the expertise and
    want to help personally, you can post in the appropriate newsgroup
    yourself.

    If you think we should answer any and all questions here, maybe we
    should change the name of the newsgroup to comp.whatever, or perhaps
    whatever.whatever.

    --
    Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
    San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
    We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.
    Keith Thompson, Jan 10, 2006
    #7
  8. tomhr

    Skarmander Guest

    Re: Outsmarting DOS C compiler to print to USB printer -- use DOSinterrupt?

    wrote:
    > What kind of spiteful person withholds an answer from some poor slob
    > simply because his post was off-topic? Would you ask a drowning person to
    > fill out a form before throwing him a life preserver?


    Depends. Did he cross-post?

    S.
    Skarmander, Jan 10, 2006
    #8
  9. On 10 Jan 2006 13:48:40 -0800, in comp.lang.c , ""
    <> wrote:

    >And the person to scold is the OP.


    And the idiot who replies to his posts, thus encouraging the OP to
    think he's in the right place. .

    >What kind of spiteful person
    >withholds an answer from some poor slob simply because his
    >post was off-topic?


    Who said to withold an answer? The answer is however not to tell him
    something free from peer review, but to direct him to where he will
    learn more and more correctly.

    >Would you ask a drowning person to fill out
    >a form before throwing him a life preserver?


    Since when has anyone drowned trying to write USB drivers?c

    oh, and you need a bett4er newsreader, yours doesn't snip sigs :-(

    >> --
    >> Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>


    >> We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.

    Mark McIntyre
    --

    ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
    http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
    ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
    Mark McIntyre, Jan 10, 2006
    #9
  10. tomhr

    Guest

    Keith Thompson wrote:
    > "" <> writes:
    > > Keith Thompson wrote:

    > [snip]
    > >> That's why we encourage people to take system-specific discussions to
    > >> system-specific newsgroups. There are plenty of newsgroups that
    > >> discuss Windows and/or DOS programming. This isn't one of them.

    > >
    > > And the person to scold is the OP. What kind of spiteful person
    > > withholds an answer from some poor slob simply because his
    > > post was off-topic? Would you ask a drowning person to fill out
    > > a form before throwing him a life preserver?

    >
    > The OP may or may not deserve to be scolded. The person who posted a
    > detailed off-topic answer certainly does.


    Sorry, but when I see three balls, I must juggle them. When I see
    two towers, I must walk between them. When I see a cry for help,
    I must reply to it.

    >
    > Drowning people don't post to Usenet; this wasn't a life-and-death
    > emergency.


    No one is criticising you for not knowing the answer.

    > The OP asked for help.


    And if I know the answer, I'm going to reply, damn the rules.

    > The best way to provide that help
    > is to redirect him to a newsgroup where the regulars actually know
    > something about the topic.


    That would be the best way. And the best way to relieve famine
    in Sudan is to end the war. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't
    try to help those starving in the refugee camps.

    > If you happen to have the expertise and
    > want to help personally, you can post in the appropriate newsgroup
    > yourself.


    If _I_ have to expend a lot of effort, it won't happen.

    >
    > If you think we should answer any and all questions here, maybe we
    > should change the name of the newsgroup to comp.whatever, or perhaps
    > whatever.whatever.


    Look, once the message has been posted here, it's water
    under the bridge. I have no problems with Richard Heathfield's
    reply where he suggested the OP take his question elsewhere.
    I did not feel any obligation to suggest that since it had already
    been done. And if I was going to play newscop, I would still say
    "This is off-topic here, but try this..."

    >
    > --
    > Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
    > San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
    > We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.
    , Jan 10, 2006
    #10
  11. tomhr

    Guest

    Mark McIntyre wrote:
    > On 10 Jan 2006 13:48:40 -0800, in comp.lang.c , ""
    > <> wrote:
    >
    > >And the person to scold is the OP.

    >
    > And the idiot who replies to his posts, thus encouraging the OP to
    > think he's in the right place. .
    >
    > >What kind of spiteful person
    > >withholds an answer from some poor slob simply because his
    > >post was off-topic?

    >
    > Who said to withold an answer? The answer is however not to tell him
    > something free from peer review, but to direct him to where he will
    > learn more and more correctly.
    >
    > >Would you ask a drowning person to fill out
    > >a form before throwing him a life preserver?

    >
    > Since when has anyone drowned trying to write USB drivers?c
    >
    > oh, and you need a bett4er newsreader, yours doesn't snip sigs :-(


    And yours doesn't spellcheck.

    >
    > >> --
    > >> Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>

    >
    > >> We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.

    > Mark McIntyre
    > --
    >
    > ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
    > http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
    > ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
    , Jan 10, 2006
    #11
  12. tomhr

    tomhr Guest

    Guys, if I'd _wanted_ to be (knowingly) off-topic, I would have written
    "George W. Bush is a slug" or "I love satellite radio."

    Is getting this program to print to a USB printer "life or death"? No.
    But the alternative to tweaking the DOS-platform program I have now is
    to buy a Windows C compiler, learning all about how it worked, then
    rewriting and debugging my old DOS-C program to work under Windows.
    This would take weeks, possibly months. Posting here seemed to (newbie)
    me to be the better alternative.

    Hey, I can appreciate someone posting, "I don't have an answer for you,
    but this other newsgroup might." But to declare that I deserve scolding
    because I didn't know this was the "wrong" group? Sheesh. May you never
    wind up in an emergency room without your insurance card.

    I'm gone. Noway2 and mensanator, thanks for your help.
    tomhr, Jan 11, 2006
    #12
  13. tomhr

    Chuck F. Guest

    Re: Outsmarting DOS C compiler to print to USB printer -- use DOSinterrupt?

    wrote:
    > Keith Thompson wrote:
    >> "" <> writes:
    >>> Keith Thompson wrote:

    >
    >> [snip]

    >
    >>>> That's why we encourage people to take system-specific
    >>>> discussions to system-specific newsgroups. There are
    >>>> plenty of newsgroups that discuss Windows and/or DOS
    >>>> programming. This isn't one of them.
    >>>
    >>> And the person to scold is the OP. What kind of spiteful
    >>> person withholds an answer from some poor slob simply
    >>> because his post was off-topic? Would you ask a drowning
    >>> person to fill out a form before throwing him a life
    >>> preserver?

    >>
    >> The OP may or may not deserve to be scolded. The person who
    >> posted a detailed off-topic answer certainly does.

    >

    .... snip ...
    >
    > And if I know the answer, I'm going to reply, damn the rules.


    So you deserve scolding, for ignoring topicality (of which you are
    obviously aware). You can always post an answer of the form:

    "Go to group xxx. I am adding that to the distribution and setting
    followups to that."

    after which you can go to group xxx yourself (assuming things are
    topical there) and answer away to your hearts content.

    There is no need for you to foul this newsgroup with this off-topic
    nonsense.

    --
    "If you want to post a followup via groups.google.com, don't use
    the broken "Reply" link at the bottom of the article. Click on
    "show options" at the top of the article, then click on the
    "Reply" at the bottom of the article headers." - Keith Thompson
    More details at: <http://cfaj.freeshell.org/google/>
    Chuck F., Jan 11, 2006
    #13
  14. In article <>,
    <> wrote:
    ....
    >And the person to scold is the OP. What kind of spiteful person
    >withholds an answer from some poor slob simply because his
    >post was off-topic? Would you ask a drowning person to fill out
    >a form before throwing him a life preserver?


    In this newsgroup, yes, they would.

    Actually, they would explain, in a artfully crafted, 172 line post, why
    life preservers are O/T. While the person drowns, of course...
    Kenny McCormack, Jan 11, 2006
    #14
  15. tomhr

    Guest

    Chuck F. wrote:
    > wrote:
    > > Keith Thompson wrote:
    > >> "" <> writes:
    > >>> Keith Thompson wrote:

    > >
    > >> [snip]

    > >
    > >>>> That's why we encourage people to take system-specific
    > >>>> discussions to system-specific newsgroups. There are
    > >>>> plenty of newsgroups that discuss Windows and/or DOS
    > >>>> programming. This isn't one of them.
    > >>>
    > >>> And the person to scold is the OP. What kind of spiteful
    > >>> person withholds an answer from some poor slob simply
    > >>> because his post was off-topic? Would you ask a drowning
    > >>> person to fill out a form before throwing him a life
    > >>> preserver?
    > >>
    > >> The OP may or may not deserve to be scolded. The person who
    > >> posted a detailed off-topic answer certainly does.

    > >

    > ... snip ...
    > >
    > > And if I know the answer, I'm going to reply, damn the rules.

    >
    > So you deserve scolding, for ignoring topicality (of which you are
    > obviously aware). You can always post an answer of the form:
    >
    > "Go to group xxx. I am adding that to the distribution and setting
    > followups to that."
    >
    > after which you can go to group xxx yourself (assuming things are
    > topical there) and answer away to your hearts content.
    >
    > There is no need for you to foul this newsgroup with this off-topic
    > nonsense.


    Why do you continue to foul this newsgroup with that off-topic
    rant about the Google reply link? It's been pointed out to you
    that the information is wrong and incomplete. Why do you
    continue to use it?

    The OP is at least able to learn. Why can't you?

    >
    > --
    > "If you want to post a followup via groups.google.com, don't use
    > the broken "Reply" link at the bottom of the article. Click on
    > "show options" at the top of the article, then click on the
    > "Reply" at the bottom of the article headers." - Keith Thompson
    > More details at: <http://cfaj.freeshell.org/google/>
    , Jan 11, 2006
    #15
  16. tomhr

    Chuck F. Guest

    Re: Outsmarting DOS C compiler to print to USB printer -- use DOSinterrupt?

    tomhr wrote:
    >

    .... snip ...
    >
    > Hey, I can appreciate someone posting, "I don't have an answer
    > for you, but this other newsgroup might." But to declare that I
    > deserve scolding because I didn't know this was the "wrong"
    > group? Sheesh. May you never wind up in an emergency room
    > without your insurance card.


    I don't believe anybody scolded _you_ for OT posting. Newbies
    generally don't know the first time. But the many others who
    replied with OT data rather than referring you do deserve scolding,
    because they (presumably) should know better.

    --
    "If you want to post a followup via groups.google.com, don't use
    the broken "Reply" link at the bottom of the article. Click on
    "show options" at the top of the article, then click on the
    "Reply" at the bottom of the article headers." - Keith Thompson
    More details at: <http://cfaj.freeshell.org/google/>
    Chuck F., Jan 11, 2006
    #16
  17. Re: Outsmarting DOS C compiler to print to USB printer -- use DOSinterrupt?

    "tomhr" <> writes:
    > Guys, if I'd _wanted_ to be (knowingly) off-topic, I would have written
    > "George W. Bush is a slug" or "I love satellite radio."
    >
    > Is getting this program to print to a USB printer "life or death"? No.
    > But the alternative to tweaking the DOS-platform program I have now is
    > to buy a Windows C compiler, learning all about how it worked, then
    > rewriting and debugging my old DOS-C program to work under Windows.
    > This would take weeks, possibly months. Posting here seemed to (newbie)
    > me to be the better alternative.
    >
    > Hey, I can appreciate someone posting, "I don't have an answer for you,
    > but this other newsgroup might." But to declare that I deserve scolding
    > because I didn't know this was the "wrong" group? Sheesh. May you never
    > wind up in an emergency room without your insurance card.
    >
    > I'm gone. Noway2 and mensanator, thanks for your help.


    I don't recall anyone scolding you. I certainly didn't. My scolding
    was directed at the person who posted an inappropriate followup rather
    than telling you where to find reliable information.

    --
    Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
    San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
    We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.
    Keith Thompson, Jan 11, 2006
    #17
  18. Re: Outsmarting DOS C compiler to print to USB printer -- use DOSinterrupt?

    "" <> writes:
    > Chuck F. wrote:

    [...]
    >> There is no need for you to foul this newsgroup with this off-topic
    >> nonsense.

    >
    > Why do you continue to foul this newsgroup with that off-topic
    > rant about the Google reply link? It's been pointed out to you
    > that the information is wrong and incomplete. Why do you
    > continue to use it?
    >
    > The OP is at least able to learn. Why can't you?
    >
    >> "If you want to post a followup via groups.google.com, don't use
    >> the broken "Reply" link at the bottom of the article. Click on
    >> "show options" at the top of the article, then click on the
    >> "Reply" at the bottom of the article headers." - Keith Thompson
    >> More details at: <http://cfaj.freeshell.org/google/>


    I've been following both this newsgroup and the groups.google.com
    problems very closely. I don't recall seeing anyone mention that the
    standard Google advice or Chris F.A. Johnson's web page is incorrect.
    (I remember someone recently saying that it didn't work for him, he
    didn't give any details.)

    If there are any errors in <http://cfaj.freeshell.org/google/> I'm
    sure Chris F.A. Johnson would be interested in knowing about it. So
    would I. If you have some concrete information on this, feel free to
    send an e-mail message directly to me or to post to this newsgroup
    (not both, please).

    I know that groups.google.com has been having some problems in the
    last few days; if those problems make the standard advice invalid, I'm
    not aware of it.

    --
    Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
    San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
    We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.
    Keith Thompson, Jan 11, 2006
    #18
  19. Re: Outsmarting DOS C compiler to print to USB printer -- use DOSinterrupt?

    Keith Thompson <> writes:
    > "" <> writes:
    >> Chuck F. wrote:

    > [...]
    >>> There is no need for you to foul this newsgroup with this off-topic
    >>> nonsense.

    >>
    >> Why do you continue to foul this newsgroup with that off-topic
    >> rant about the Google reply link? It's been pointed out to you
    >> that the information is wrong and incomplete. Why do you
    >> continue to use it?
    >>
    >> The OP is at least able to learn. Why can't you?
    >>
    >>> "If you want to post a followup via groups.google.com, don't use
    >>> the broken "Reply" link at the bottom of the article. Click on
    >>> "show options" at the top of the article, then click on the
    >>> "Reply" at the bottom of the article headers." - Keith Thompson
    >>> More details at: <http://cfaj.freeshell.org/google/>

    >
    > I've been following both this newsgroup and the groups.google.com
    > problems very closely. I don't recall seeing anyone mention that the
    > standard Google advice or Chris F.A. Johnson's web page is incorrect.
    > (I remember someone recently saying that it didn't work for him, he
    > didn't give any details.)
    >
    > If there are any errors in <http://cfaj.freeshell.org/google/> I'm
    > sure Chris F.A. Johnson would be interested in knowing about it. So
    > would I. If you have some concrete information on this, feel free to
    > send an e-mail message directly to me or to post to this newsgroup
    > (not both, please).


    Ok, I got an e-mail response from mensanator. As far as I can tell,
    his complaint is that there's *another* workaround that Chris's web
    page doesn't mention.

    But it appears that the whole thing is now moot. I'll start a new
    thread with the details (look for an article with "Google" in the
    subject header).

    --
    Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
    San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
    We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.
    Keith Thompson, Jan 11, 2006
    #19
  20. On 10 Jan 2006 15:03:27 -0800, in comp.lang.c , ""
    <> wrote:

    >
    >And yours doesn't spellcheck.


    It spellchecks just fine, I don't use such a stupid facility for
    trivia like emails and usenet.
    Mark McIntyre
    --

    ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
    http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
    ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
    Mark McIntyre, Jan 11, 2006
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Burak Arslan
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    65
    Burak Arslan
    Dec 28, 2013
  2. Burak Arslan
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    60
    Burak Arslan
    Dec 29, 2013
  3. Ian Kelly
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    56
    Ian Kelly
    Dec 29, 2013
  4. Burak Arslan
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    56
    Burak Arslan
    Dec 29, 2013
  5. Ian Kelly
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    68
    Ian Kelly
    Dec 29, 2013
Loading...

Share This Page