On Thu, 2020-09-17 at 15:38 +0200, Jörn-Ingo Weigert wrote: > Hi Bastian,nice idea. As SANE is already network capable to provide > connected scanners to the network, > (simply a network device) it make not really sense, to provide > sane(d) via Flatpak in my eyes.
I have no plans on running saned inside the sandbox. It's about running a server on the outside of the sandbox, talking to the real hardware, so that applications don't need direct hardware access. > however, having SANE-based applications like XSane/ scan-image as > Flatpak version, maybe a nice idea. Most of them are blocking on having a scanner portal, which is what this is about. For example: https://github.com/flathub/flathub/pull/1111 And paperwork needs access to all the devices, and ship its own sane- backends, which means it only works with the scanners supported by sane-backends: https://github.com/flathub/work.openpaper.Paperwork > But for this you don't need to modify saned. ... You need to, if you don't want saned listening on the network, being auto-activatable, and being able to add a portal/proxy in between so that scanner access is a changeable permission. We can't easily filter network calls, and most scanner apps don't need network access, so giving them network access opens the sandbox for no good reason. > Or do I miss here something?
