[sane-devel] Canon LiDE 25 scanner
Hi Stephan,
On Wednesday 28 September 2005 23:27, Stephan February wrote:
hello
On Wednesday 28 September 2005 22:23, Gerhard Jaeger wrote:
hmmm, I thought my last mail was quite clear!
I don't think it's necessary to snoop the USB traffic - it's necessary to
find out the correct clock values...
Armed with Gerard's suggestion, I have been playing around with the timings
and motor speed settings for my Canon LiDE 25.
thanks for that.
Here is a motor/timing setting which currently works well for me, and without
the previous annoying grinding noises. It also looks like my problems with
saned are related to previously reporting timing issues when network
scanning. The latter I've confirmed by doing a saned scan via localhost.
Please comment if you see anything obviously wrong or dangerous here 'cause I
really just fiddled until I was satisfied.
if it's working, everything is fine ;)
snip
{ MODEL_CANON1200, 8, 51, 9,
/* Motor settings (PWM and PWM_Duty) */
/* =75dpi =100dpi =150dpi =200dpi =300dpi */
{{ 8, 31, 1 }, { 8, 31, 1 }, { 8, 31, 1 }, { 8, 31, 1 }, { 8, 31, 1 },
/* =400dpi =600dpi =800dpi =1200dpi =2400dpi */
{ 8, 31, 1 }, { 8, 31, 1 }, { 8, 31, 1 }, { 8, 31, 1 }, { 8, 31, 1 }},
/* Color mode MCLK settings */
{ 9.0, 9.0, 9.0, 9.0, 9.0, 9.0, 9.0, 9.0, 9.0, 9.0 },
{ 9.0, 9.0, 9.0, 9.0, 9.0, 9.0, 9.0, 9.0, 9.0, 9.0 },
/* Gray mode MCLK settings */
{ 7.0, 7.0, 6.0, 6.0, 6.0, 6.0, 6.0, 6.0, 6.0, 6.0 },
{ 6.5, 6.5, 6.0, 6.0, 6.0, 6.0, 8.0, 12.0, 12.0, 12.0 }
},
just wondering, why the MCLKs are that high - ain't the scans too slow?
snip
... and ...
snip
/** Canon LiDE25 */
static HWDef Hw0x04A9_0x2220 =
{
0.80, /* dMaxMotorSpeed (Max_Speed) */
0.200, /* dMaxMoveSpeed (Max_Speed) */
0.0,/* dHighSpeed */
snip
If I were to create a patch, would it be better if an entirely new section
for
the LiDE25 was created e.g.?
.
.
{ MODEL_LIDE25, 8, 51, 9,
/* Motor settings (PWM and PWM_Duty) */
I'll do that and submitt it to CVS today...
Thanks again for that work.
Gerhard
[sane-devel] CanoScan LiDE 25 - Solved Partial
Hi, On Thu, Sep 29, 2005 at 05:32:24AM +0800, Stephan February wrote: On Wednesday 28 September 2005 09:49, Stephan wrote: However under remote scanning saned still locks up after what sounds like a) motor initialization and b)turning the lamp on. I've found some previous reports of saned having timing issues. IIRC, there haven't been found any timing issues in saned in recent years. Using saned changes the timing (and may change buffer sizes etc.). This may reveal problems in the backend or the scanner itsself. I don't say that saned is perfectly free of bugs but it's long time ago that really a saned bug caused a backend to stop working. http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/sane-devel/2003-May/007640.html Also in that case I think no bug in saned was found. This seems to be the problem I'm having since the following test works perfectly: #scanimage -x 150 -y 180 -d net:localhost --format pnm /tmp/outfile.pnm ... but locks-up/hangs saned when doing from a remote host: No firewall/packet filter involved? From your first log it really looks like something blocks the data port. If that's not the case, please also check the recent thread about the Umax Astra 2200 network problems and send debug logs as mentioned there. Please try to reproduce the hang when debugging is enabled. Bye, Henning
[sane-devel] CanoScan LiDE 25 - Solved Partial
On Thursday 29 September 2005 19:19, Henning Meier-Geinitz wrote: No firewall/packet filter involved? From your first log it really looks like something blocks the data port. Thanks! I removed the firewall on that machine and remote scanning via saned now works perfectly. Thanks Henning Cheers Stephan
[sane-devel] macosx/darwin -- canoscan lide25 -- partial success
Hi, I am trying to get my canoscan lide25 scanner (it seems to be supported through the SANE plustek backend) on mac os x. sane-find-scanner detects the scanner. Included below is the log for sane-find-scanner -v -v. However, the bad news: scanimage -L fails to list the scanner -- I am including the log for that as well. I don't think I missed out on anything obvious - but please advise if that is the case. Regards, -Shouri --- [diode:~] sane-find-scanner -v -v This is sane-find-scanner from sane-backends 1.0.16-cvs # sane-find-scanner will now attempt to detect your scanner. If the # result is different from what you expected, first make sure your # scanner is powered up and properly connected to your computer. searching for SCSI scanners: # No SCSI scanners found. If you expected something different, make sure that # you have loaded a SCSI driver for your SCSI adapter. searching for USB scanners: trying libusb: device descriptor of 0x05ac/0x8005 at 001:001-05ac-8005-09-00 (Apple Computer, Inc. OHCI Root Hub Simulation) bLength 18 bDescriptorType 1 bcdUSB1.00 bDeviceClass 9 bDeviceSubClass 0 bDeviceProtocol 0 bMaxPacketSize0 8 idVendor 0x05AC idProduct 0x8005 bcdDevice 1.90 iManufacturer 2 (Apple Computer, Inc.) iProduct 1 (OHCI Root Hub Simulation) iSerialNumber 0 () bNumConfigurations1 configuration 0 bLength 10 bDescriptorType 2 wTotalLength 27 bNumInterfaces 1 bConfigurationValue 1 iConfiguration 0 () bmAttributes 96 (Self-poweredRemote Wakeup) MaxPower 0 mA interface 0 altsetting 0 bLength9 bDescriptorType4 bInterfaceNumber 0 bAlternateSetting 0 bNumEndpoints 1 bInterfaceClass9 bInterfaceSubClass 0 bInterfaceProtocol 1 iInterface 0 () endpoint 0 bLength 8 bDescriptorType 5 bEndpointAddress 0x81 (in 0x01) bmAttributes 3 (interrupt) wMaxPacketSize8 bInterval 255 ms bRefresh 0 bSynchAddress 0 device descriptor of 0x05ac/0x8005 at 002:001-05ac-8005-09-00 (Apple Computer, Inc. OHCI Root Hub Simulation) bLength 18 bDescriptorType 1 bcdUSB1.00 bDeviceClass 9 bDeviceSubClass 0 bDeviceProtocol 0 bMaxPacketSize0 8 idVendor 0x05AC idProduct 0x8005 bcdDevice 1.90 iManufacturer 2 (Apple Computer, Inc.) iProduct 1 (OHCI Root Hub Simulation) iSerialNumber 0 () bNumConfigurations1 configuration 0 bLength 10 bDescriptorType 2 wTotalLength 27 bNumInterfaces 1 bConfigurationValue 1 iConfiguration 0 () bmAttributes 96 (Self-poweredRemote Wakeup) MaxPower 0 mA interface 0 altsetting 0 bLength9 bDescriptorType4 bInterfaceNumber 0 bAlternateSetting 0 bNumEndpoints 1 bInterfaceClass9 bInterfaceSubClass 0 bInterfaceProtocol 1 iInterface 0 () endpoint 0 bLength 8 bDescriptorType 5 bEndpointAddress 0x81 (in 0x01) bmAttributes 3 (interrupt) wMaxPacketSize8 bInterval 255 ms bRefresh 0 bSynchAddress 0 device descriptor of 0x04a9/0x2220 at 002:002-04a9-2220-ff-00 (Canon CanoScan) bLength 18 bDescriptorType 1 bcdUSB1.10 bDeviceClass 255 bDeviceSubClass 0 bDeviceProtocol 255 bMaxPacketSize0 8 idVendor 0x04A9 idProduct 0x2220 bcdDevice 1.00 iManufacturer 1 (Canon) iProduct 2 (CanoScan) iSerialNumber 0 () bNumConfigurations1 configuration 0 bLength 9 bDescriptorType 2 wTotalLength 39 bNumInterfaces 1 bConfigurationValue 1 iConfiguration 0 () bmAttributes 160 (Remote Wakeup) MaxPower 500 mA interface 0 altsetting 0 bLength9 bDescriptorType4 bInterfaceNumber 0 bAlternateSetting 0 bNumEndpoints 3 bInterfaceClass255 bInterfaceSubClass 0 bInterfaceProtocol 255 iInterface 0 () endpoint 0 bLength 7 bDescriptorType 5 bEndpointAddress 0x81 (in 0x01) bmAttributes 3 (interrupt) wMaxPacketSize1 bInterval 16 ms bRefresh 0 bSynchAddress 0 endpoint 1 bLength 7 bDescriptorType 5 bEndpointAddress 0x82 (in 0x02) bmAttributes 2 (bulk) wMaxPacketSize64 bInterval 0 ms bRefresh 0 bSynchAddress 0 endpoint 2 bLength 7 bDescriptorType 5 bEndpointAddress 0x03 (out 0x03) bmAttributes
[sane-devel] macosx/darwin -- canoscan lide25 -- partial success
Hi, On Thu, Sep 29, 2005 at 09:45:13AM -0400, Shouri Chatterjee wrote: I am trying to get my canoscan lide25 scanner (it seems to be supported through the SANE plustek backend) on mac os x. ... From sane-find-scanner output: Couldn't set configuration: usb_set_configuration(SetConfiguration): device not opened for exclusive access Just a guess: Either something else has already opened your scanner (maybe some other driver?) or there is a problem with the libusb you use. Backend output: [plustek] usbDev_open(libusb:002:002,0x04A9-0x2220) - 0x300980 [sanei_usb] sanei_usb_open: libusb complained: usb_set_configuration(SetConfiguration): device not opened for exclusive access [plustek] sanei_usb_open failed: No such file or directory (2) [plustek] open failed: -1 [plustek] sane_get_devices (0xb5f0, 0) Same here. Which version of SANE do you actually use? I can see that it's from CVS, but from when exactly? Recent versions (after 2005-09-23) should ignore failures in usb_set_configuration(). But even with that version you may get errors later on. Bye, Henning
[sane-devel] [PATCH] gt68xx-Backend: OpticSlim M12
Hi list, please find attached a patch to make the OpticSlim M12 scanner work. Work here means, scan a sheet. Calibration is not available, area selection is limited - positioning does currently not work. The patch is meant as a starting point to make gt68xx based sheet-fed scanner work. It should apply to the current cvs. @Henning: It's up to you to include it. Maybe some changes are needed - I'll test them. Ciao, Gerhard -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: gt68xx-m12.patch Type: text/x-diff Size: 9623 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/sane-devel/attachments/20050929/0dc3df2b/gt68xx-m12-0001.bin From sho...@gmail.com Thu Sep 29 15:43:28 2005 From: sho...@gmail.com (Shouri Chatterjee) Date: Thu Sep 29 15:43:55 2005 Subject: [sane-devel] Re: macosx/darwin -- canoscan lide25 -- partial success Message-ID: fed5dde305092908431be65...@mail.gmail.com Hi, I am using libusb-0.1.10a. libusb-0.1.4.4.2.dylib The sane version is 1.0.16 - today's snapshot. Here is a more detailed version of the log - I used 128 for both SANE_DEBUG_PLUSTEK and SANE_DEBUG_SANEI_USB this time. You are right - the device seems to be unavailable for some strange reason unclear to me... I can't seem to find anything suspicious looking through `ps -aexww` either. I had installed canon's exclusive drivers. Do you think these might be interfering? -Shouri . [sanei_usb] sanei_usb_open: trying to open device `libusb:002:002-04a9-2220-ff-00' usb_os_open: 04a9:2220 usb_os_open(USBDeviceOpenSeize): another process has device opened for exclusive access usb_set_configuration: called for config 1 USB error: usb_set_configuration(SetConfiguration): device not opened for exclusive access [sanei_usb] sanei_usb_open: libusb complained: usb_set_configuration(SetConfiguration): device not opened for exclusive access usb_os_close: 04a9:2220 [plustek] sanei_usb_open failed: No such file or directory (2) [plustek] open failed: -1 [plustek] sane_get_devices (0xb5f0, 0) .
[sane-devel] [PATCH] gt68xx-Backend: OpticSlim M12
Hi,
On Thu, Sep 29, 2005 at 05:05:18PM +0200, Gerhard Jaeger wrote:
please find attached a patch to make the OpticSlim M12 scanner
work. Work here means, scan a sheet.
I have included the patch into CVS with some modifications. Please
check if it still works. See below for details.
Calibration is not available,
How does that work with sheet-fed scanners at all? Is there also some
kind of calibration area?
area selection is limited - positioning does currently not work.
That means that length and width can be changed but not tl-x and tl-y?
The patch is meant as a starting point to make gt68xx based sheet-fed scanner
work. It should apply to the current cvs.
@Henning: It's up to you to include it. Maybe some changes are needed - I'll
test them.
Ciao,
Gerhard
--- sane-backends/doc/descriptions/gt68xx.desc.orig 2005-09-27
11:19:02.0 +0200
+++ sane-backends/doc/descriptions/gt68xx.desc2005-09-29
16:57:39.0 +0200
[...]
+ if (s-dev-model-flags GT68XX_FLAG_SHEET_FED)
+{
+ s-val[OPT_BACKTRACK_LINES].w = 0x3f;
+ DISABLE (OPT_BACKTRACK_LINES);
+}
+
Is it really necessary to disable that option unconditionally?
Otherwise I would move the check for GT68XX_FLAG_SHEET_FED up to the
normal setting of that option (normally 0x3f is used for CCD).
- RIE (gt68xx_scanner_calibrate (s, scan_request));
+ if ( !(s-dev-model-flags GT68XX_FLAG_SHEET_FED)) {
+ RIE (gt68xx_scanner_calibrate (s, scan_request));
+ }
I haven't changed that because coarse and fine calibration is turned
off anyway for that scanner.
--- sane-backends/backend/gt68xx_devices.c.orig 2005-09-27
11:18:57.0 +0200
+++ sane-backends/backend/gt68xx_devices.c2005-09-29 11:29:05.0
+0200
I used a new command_set for sheet-fed types. this way we have more
flexibility.
Also there is one more level of indirection (always call
gt68xx_device_*, not gt68xx_generic_* or gt68xx_gt6816_* directly).
--- sane-backends/backend/gt68xx_generic.c.orig 2005-09-27
11:18:57.0 +0200
+++ sane-backends/backend/gt68xx_generic.c2005-09-29 11:29:49.0
+0200
@@ -96,10 +96,17 @@ gt68xx_generic_read_scanned_data (GT68xx
RIE (gt68xx_device_req (dev, req, req));
- if (req[0] == 0)
-*ready = SANE_TRUE;
+ *ready = SANE_FALSE;
+ if (dev-model-flags GT68XX_FLAG_SHEET_FED)
+{
+ if (req[0] == 0 req[1] == 0x35 )
+ *ready = SANE_TRUE;
+}
Is this really necessary? I know that 95% of the gt68xx scanners
return 00 35 but I only test for 00 beacuse of the 5% which don't
return the 35. If it also works with the test only for the 00, I would
prefer to keep the old version. At the moment, i have apllied your
patch, however.
in gt68xx_geneirc_set_exposure-time:
+ if (dev-model-flags GT68XX_FLAG_SHEET_FED)
+return SANE_STATUS_GOOD;
+
Not applied. Added a check in gt68xx_high.c instead.
--- sane-backends/backend/gt68xx_gt6816.c.orig2005-06-01
13:28:18.0 +0200
+++ sane-backends/backend/gt68xx_gt6816.c 2005-09-29 11:23:28.0
+0200
@@ -217,6 +217,9 @@ gt6816_carriage_home (GT68xx_Device * de
{
GT68xx_Packet req;
+ if (dev-model-flags GT68XX_FLAG_SHEET_FED)
+return SANE_STATUS_GOOD;
+
Not applied. Added checks in gt68xx.c instead.
In stop scan:
{
GT68xx_Packet req;
+ if (dev-model-flags GT68XX_FLAG_SHEET_FED)
+{
+ memset (req, 0, sizeof (req));
+ req[0] = 0x42;
+ req[1] = 0x01;
Not applied. Used gt6801_stop_scan instead in the new command_set.
Bye,
Henning
[Fwd: Re: [sane-devel] [PATCH] gt68xx-Backend: OpticSlim M12]
-- m.vr.gr. Gerard Klaver -- next part -- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: gerard klaver ger...@gkall.hobby.nl Subject: Re: [sane-devel] [PATCH] gt68xx-Backend: OpticSlim M12 Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 20:57:33 +0200 Size: 2170 Url: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/sane-devel/attachments/20050929/3f31a021/attachment.mht From henn...@meier-geinitz.de Thu Sep 29 19:46:39 2005 From: henn...@meier-geinitz.de (Henning Meier-Geinitz) Date: Thu Sep 29 19:47:05 2005 Subject: [sane-devel] Re: macosx/darwin -- canoscan lide25 -- partial success In-Reply-To: fed5dde305092908431be65...@mail.gmail.com References: fed5dde305092908431be65...@mail.gmail.com Message-ID: 20050929194639.gf17...@meier-geinitz.de Hi, On Thu, Sep 29, 2005 at 11:43:28AM -0400, Shouri Chatterjee wrote: I had installed canon's exclusive drivers. Do you think these might be interfering? If this is a driver for your scanner I'm pretty sure that this is the cause for your trouble. Try without that driver. Bye, Henning
