Hi,
I wanted to implement support for the wait for button option, available at
least in epson2 and epkowa backends, but I have a problem with sane_cancel().
If the wait for button parameter is set to true, sane (the backend) stops
at sane_start() and waits for the user to press the button on
2010/3/4 K?re S?rs kare.sars at iki.fi:
Hi,
I wanted to implement support for the wait for button option, available at
least in epson2 and epkowa backends, but I have a problem with sane_cancel().
If the wait for button ?parameter is set to true, sane (the backend) stops
at sane_start() and
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010 14:44:56 +0200
K?re S?rs kare.sars at iki.fi wrote:
Hi,
I wanted to implement support for the wait for button option, available at
least in epson2 and epkowa backends, but I have a problem with sane_cancel().
btw I've never been able to test that functionality ;)
--
Hi,
I'm a bit confused with the use of sane_cancel(). I noticed today that the
pixma backend requires a sane_cancel after each scan (libksane did not work
correctly with the pixma backend). I have read here on the list:
5. be aware that a proper front-end in batch mode will call
sane_start() at
Hi again,
On Wednesdayen den 16 July 2008 02:02:36 K?re S?rs wrote:
Hi,
I'm a bit confused with the use of sane_cancel(). I noticed today that the
pixma backend requires a sane_cancel after each scan (libksane did not work
correctly with the pixma backend). I have read here on the list:
5.
pixma backend can handle batch scan, I've tested it under both xsane and
scanimage -b :
$ scanimage -b
Scanning -1 pages, incrementing by 1, numbering from 1
Scanning page 1
Scanned page 1. (scanner status = 5)
Scanning page 2
Scanned page 2. (scanner status = 5)
Scanning page 3
Scanned page 3.
On Wednesdayen den 16 July 2008 09:28:49 Nicolas wrote:
pixma backend can handle batch scan, I've tested it under both xsane and
scanimage -b :
$ scanimage -b
Scanning -1 pages, incrementing by 1, numbering from 1
Scanning page 1
Scanned page 1. (scanner status = 5)
Scanning page 2
On 7/16/08, K?re S?rs kare.sars at kolumbus.fi wrote:
On Wednesdayen den 16 July 2008 09:28:49 Nicolas wrote:
pixma backend can handle batch scan, I've tested it under both xsane and
scanimage -b :
$ scanimage -b
Scanning -1 pages, incrementing by 1, numbering from 1
Scanning
Hi,
m. allan noah wrote:
On 7/15/08, K?re S?rs kare.sars at kolumbus.fi wrote:
Hi again,
On Wednesdayen den 16 July 2008 02:02:36 K?re S?rs wrote:
Hi,
I'm a bit confused with the use of sane_cancel(). I noticed today that the
pixma backend requires a sane_cancel after each
On 7/15/08, K?re S?rs kare.sars at kolumbus.fi wrote:
Hi again,
On Wednesdayen den 16 July 2008 02:02:36 K?re S?rs wrote:
Hi,
I'm a bit confused with the use of sane_cancel(). I noticed today that the
pixma backend requires a sane_cancel after each scan (libksane did not work
On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 9:41 PM, m. allan noah kitno455 at gmail.com wrote:
sane_cancel is meant to be called asynchronously, so it probably
should not send any commands to the scanner.
sane_read should probably check a 'no longer scanning' flag, and do
whatever cleanup is required.
take
On 2/27/08, Ilia Sotnikov hostcc at gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 9:41 PM, m. allan noah kitno455 at gmail.com wrote:
sane_cancel is meant to be called asynchronously, so it probably
should not send any commands to the scanner.
sane_read should probably check a 'no longer
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 9:31 AM, Ilia Sotnikov hostcc at gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 9:41 PM, m. allan noah kitno455 at gmail.com wrote:
sane_cancel is meant to be called asynchronously, so it probably
should not send any commands to the scanner.
sane_read should probably
Hi all,
I am trying to cancel a page scan. so i call sane_cancel while
scanning is in progress
but the application get stuck on the next sane_read,
instead of return SANE_STATUS_CANCELLED
this its what i get from debugging
[hp5590] sane_hp5590_read, length 850, left 538900
[hp5590] hp5590_read
sane_cancel is meant to be called asynchronously, so it probably
should not send any commands to the scanner.
sane_read should probably check a 'no longer scanning' flag, and do
whatever cleanup is required.
take it away Ilia :)
allan
On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 11:39 AM, tobias alarcon extobias at
On Tuesday 09 May 2006 19:44, Henning Meier-Geinitz wrote:
[...]
Why not just kill the reader process in sane_cancel? Do you think the
way this is done in the existing backends (e.g. mustek) is wrong?
I've implemented a reader process like mustek.c in my backend. Everything
seems to work and
Hi,
On Tuesday 09 May 2006 19:44, Henning Meier-Geinitz wrote:
[...]
Why not just kill the reader process in sane_cancel? Do you think the
way this is done in the existing backends (e.g. mustek) is wrong?
No, not at all. I was a little bit confused because I've designed my driver
before I
Hi,
On 2006-04-25 15:07, Wittawat Yamwong wrote:
Should/must/may a frontend call sane_read after sane_cancel?
I think it may but it doesn't need to.
I can't find an explicit statement in the standard that it's forbidden
to do so. In fact, there is even a status code for sane_read for this
case.
Hi!
Should/must/may a frontend call sane_read after sane_cancel?
Case I: sane_cancel was called in a signal handler or in other thread. The
reader thread still keeps calling sane_read until it returns an error or EOF.
That's clear for me.
Case II: The frontend has read a block of image data
Hi Wittawat,
On Tuesday 25 April 2006 14:07, Wittawat Yamwong wrote:
Should/must/may a frontend call sane_read after sane_cancel?
[...]
This is important to my backend (pixma). It would be much more complex if
frontends are not required to call sane_read after sane_cancel [...]
I don't know
20 matches
Mail list logo
