[sane-devel] Patches for SANE 1.0.9 be/fe compiled on IRIX
Actually, I don't understand this part of the dc210/dc240 changes: #ifdef HAVE_TCSENDBREAK +# if defined(__sgi) + /* Maybe you should consider the following for all the platforms, not just + IRIX. Again, inspired by the gPhoto2 DC210 camera library setup */ + + ioctl (camera->fd, TCSBRK, 0); + ioctl (camera->fd, TCSBRK, 1); +# else tcsendbreak (camera->fd, 4); +# endif #else Is this saying that on Irix HAVE_TCSENDBREAK is set by configure, but you don't want to use it? Why not? -- Peter Fales Lucent Technologies, Room 1C-436 N9IYJ 2000 N Naperville Rd PO Box 3033 internet: psfa...@lucent.com Naperville, IL 60566-7033 work: (630) 979-8031 On Tue, Jan 07, 2003 at 12:46:32AM +0100, Andrea Suatoni wrote: > Henning Meier-Geinitz wrote: > > > > In order to compile properly the two packages, > > > > Was there anything that didn't compile at all? I don't ahve access to > > Irix any longer, so the last version tested was 1.0.8. > > Nothing specific, just that the SGI freeware is built with the SGI MIPSpro > C/C++ compilers (not with GCC) and installed in a specific non standard place > (/usr/freeware and below). There are many warnings during compilation (SGI > compilers can be very picky) that I shut down in my packaging Makefile (not > sent to this list, because it not interesting for you). > > I'm currently away from my SGI boxes 'till the end of this week, so I have no > access to the source code right now. However, I'll try to answer to your > questions based on what I remember. > > > > +++ sane-backends-1.0.9-patched/backend/Makefile.in Thu Dec 12 21:55:32 > > > 2002 > > > @@ -46,6 +46,7 @@ > > > CFLAGS = @CFLAGS@ > > > LDFLAGS = @LDFLAGS@ > > > BACKENDLIBS = @LIBS@ @DL_LIB@ > > > +GPHOTO2_LIBS = @GPHOTO2_LIBS@ > > > DEFS = @DEFS@ > > > > > > LIBTOOL = ../libtool > > > @@ -135,6 +136,11 @@ > > > > > > > > > .PHONY: all clean depend dist distclean install uninstall > > > + > > > +libsane-gphoto2.la: gphoto2.lo gphoto2-s.lo $(EXTRA) $(LIBOBJS) > > > + @$(LIBTOOL) $(MLINK) $(CC) -export-dynamic -o $@ $($*_LIBS) \ > > > + $(LDFLAGS) $(GPHOTO2_LIBS) $(BACKENDLIBS) $^ -rpath $(libsanedir) \ > > > + -version-info $(V_MAJOR):$(V_REV):$(V_MINOR) > > > > > > libsane-%.la: %.lo %-s.lo $(EXTRA) $(LIBOBJS) > > > @$(LIBTOOL) $(MLINK) $(CC) -export-dynamic -o $@ $($*_LIBS) \ > > > > What's the reason for the gphoto2 changes and the separate rule for > > building the library? > > There is a specific reason, in that I didn't want to make the whole > sane-backends package dependent from gPhoto2. The IRIX packages are built in > subsystems, and each subsystem have its own set of package dependencies > (called prerequisites in SGI terminology). A given subsystem can be installed > only if all its prerequisistes are satisfied. Differently from RPM (or a > similar package concept), an IRIX package is normally one distribution file (a > .tardist), internally subdivided in subsystems. > In other words, while with RPM you have package.rpm, package-devel.rpm, etc, > with IRIX inst images you have package.tardist, containing all the subsystems > at once (bin, lib, relnotes, man, etc). > > In the case of gPhoto2, without the above modification I would be forced to > make the whole sane-backends package dependent from the gPhoto2 libraries. > That is, the user would be forced to install also the libraries subsystem from > the gPhoto2 packages, even if he/she has no digital camera. Since the only > SANE backend that needs the gPhoto2 libraries is the gPhoto2 backend, I > modified the config rules so that libgphoto2 is only linked with this specific > backend, and not with all the other SANE backends. In this way, I can move the > SANE gPhoto2 backend to a separate subsystem, which depends from the gPhoto2 > libraries. If the user doesn't need the gPhoto2 features, he/she will be > nevertheless able to install the remaining SANE backends without be forced to > install also the gPhoto2 libraries. > > Additionally, depending from the way the runtime linker loader is implemented > in the various OS, forcing the gPhoto2 libraries to be linked with all the > SANE backends could require the load and symbols resolution of that library at > run time (that is, except in the case of the SANE gPhoto2 backend, all the > backends potentially consume more memory than necessary). > > > > diff -ruN sane-backends-1.0.9/backend/as6e.c > > > sane-backends-1.0.9-patched/backend/as6e.c > > > --- sane-backends-1.0.9/backend/as6e.cTue Dec 5 20:10:20 2000 > > > +++ sane-backends-1.0.9-patched/backend/as6e.cThu Dec 12 21:56:54 > > > 2002 > > > @@ -604,8 +604,7 @@ > > > return (SANE_STATUS_GOOD); > > > } /*else */ > > > } > > > - else > > > -return (SANE_STATUS_IO_ERROR); > > > + return (SANE_STATUS_IO_ERROR); > > > } > > > > Is this to fix a warning or is
[sane-devel] Re: modules/microtek
Hi Moby, the Scanmaker 5700 is not yet supported by SANE. But there may be a chanc= e to=20 get it to work via the firewire interface. I have no experiences with thi= s,=20 but I think there is a kernel module which makes a firewire device appear= ing=20 as a generic SCSI device (/dev/sg). Then you should be able to detect= the=20 scanner with sane-find-scanner and if we are lucky the scanner uses comma= nds=20 similar to the microtek2 scanners.=20 Perhaps somebody in the SANE mailing list can give some hints concerning = the=20 firewire setup? If sane-find-scanner detects your scanner please follow the instructions = in=20 the manpage and send me a logfile. Regards, Karsten On Thursday 02 January 2003 17:44, you wrote: > I am running Red Hat 8.0 with a 2.4.19-opp18 kernel. > I have a Microtek Scanmaker 5700. I can't detect it > from > the USB or from the PCMCIA slot where I have a Belkin > F5U512 firewire card. I have installed the sane > backend > package. Could you tell me how to get Sane to detect > the scanner or suggest some modules to load. > >Regards, > moby > > __ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. > http://mailplus.yahoo.com
[sane-devel] epson perfection 660
On Sunday, 5. January 2003 13:58, Karl Heinz Kremer wrote: > It may work with the Plustek backend. Or may not! I suggest to check for the chip inside! There's a LM983x check on the download site for the Plustek backend, called "merlin testprogram": http://www.gjaeger.de/scanner/test/checkmerlin.tar.gz You should have loaded the scanner kernel module... Gerhard > > On Sun, Jan 05, 2003 at 01:31:54PM +0100, tcp-isim tcp-isim wrote: > > Is is possible to use the EPSON PERFECTION 660 under > > linux? I didn't see an article witch explains it's > > possible to use it. > > Who hnows how to use the EPSON PERFECTION 660 with > > SANE ? > > David > > > > ___ > > Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @yahoo.fr gratuite et en français ! > > Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com > > ___ > > Sane-devel mailing list > > sane-de...@www.mostang.com > > http://www.mostang.com/mailman/listinfo/sane-devel
[sane-devel] HR6 V2 Collor Page Parallel Port
Hi, On Saturday, 4. January 2003 03:13, Adelson Santos de Oliveira wrote: > Hi, > > I've been trying to get the ASICs for Genius HR6 V2 CollorPage Parallel > Port. I didn't get it yet. you might open the scanner and have a closer look athe the silicon stuff inside - I know not a very good idea, but almost all the scanner I got here are rather easy to open... > > But,I've noticed some changes in list of Sane supported scanners. Now > there are two mentions for HR6 V2. > > Does its Parallel Port version have Sane support now? Currently not, as we do not know what ASICs are inside. It seems, that they are not compatible with the Plustek ones... Gerhard
[sane-devel] Epson 1250u vs plustek-45-TEST5
Hi Gene, On Sunday, 5. January 2003 21:39, Gene Heskett wrote: > Hi all; > > The artifact is still there, but I have a more pressing problem, > I've forgotten the location of the focus variable, at 600 dpi, I'm > seriously out of registration. > > Humm, might have found it, the comment says "sensor distance" & 16 > is way too high for my scanner, so I'm rebuilding it at 8. Is that > the right setting for your's Reinhart? In which case we have a > pretty serious production tolerances problem with this beast... hmpf, that was my fault. In the meantime fixed - 8 is the correct value. > Humm, finished the scan at 600 dpi ok, small piece of the original, > then segfaulted without showing it to me. And thats all it says in > the shell when it returned. But I didn't acquire a preview first, > just sent it to do that same scan again. Restart, do preview, get > segfault at end of forward scan. I sure wish this thing would make > up it mind. Restart from icon, save prefs (again) first, preview > works. Restore teeny size & do 600 dpi. Worked, and the > registration is now spot on. White line artifact still there. It is not present here nay longer on my 1260, even the TPA stuff works now. But the code is not available currently... > > I don't think this is quite "Ready for prime time" :-( We still > have that white vertical line artifact, and the segfault at the end > of the scan seems to be somewhat of a coin toss. Phase of the > moon, odd/even minute, whatever. - phase of the moon! I didn't get any segfaults here after a scan. > > Suggestion/feature request: Can this thing get a focus adjustment > made available in the gui, and saved in the prefs? We no doubt > have some users who aren't quite comfortable shuffling around in > the source code with vi just to get the proper focus/registration > for their individual scanner, and obviously from this, hard coding > it isn't going to be optimum for everybody. Mine was pretty bad > when set for 16, but I remembered 8 was pretty good from previous > testing, and it still is. No need to have this adjustment, as it should be okay for all devices... Cheers Gerhard
[sane-devel] Patches for SANE 1.0.9 be/fe compiled on IRIX
The patches to dc210.c, dc240.c, dc210.conf, dc240.conf, dc25.conf, and gphoto2.conf look reasonable so I've pulled them into CVS. The changes to dc240.h aren't needed because I don't depend on packed directory structures any more. The patches to backend/Makefile.in and acinclude.m4 seem to work OK, but I'll let Henning decide whether to accept those. -- Peter Fales On Tue, Jan 07, 2003 at 12:46:32AM +0100, Andrea Suatoni wrote: > Henning Meier-Geinitz wrote: > > > > In order to compile properly the two packages, > > > > Was there anything that didn't compile at all? I don't ahve access to > > Irix any longer, so the last version tested was 1.0.8. > > Nothing specific, just that the SGI freeware is built with the SGI MIPSpro > C/C++ compilers (not with GCC) and installed in a specific non standard place > (/usr/freeware and below). There are many warnings during compilation (SGI > compilers can be very picky) that I shut down in my packaging Makefile (not > sent to this list, because it not interesting for you). > > I'm currently away from my SGI boxes 'till the end of this week, so I have no > access to the source code right now. However, I'll try to answer to your > questions based on what I remember. > > > > +++ sane-backends-1.0.9-patched/backend/Makefile.in Thu Dec 12 21:55:32 > > > 2002 > > > @@ -46,6 +46,7 @@ > > > CFLAGS = @CFLAGS@ > > > LDFLAGS = @LDFLAGS@ > > > BACKENDLIBS = @LIBS@ @DL_LIB@ > > > +GPHOTO2_LIBS = @GPHOTO2_LIBS@ > > > DEFS = @DEFS@ > > > > > > LIBTOOL = ../libtool > > > @@ -135,6 +136,11 @@ > > > > > > > > > .PHONY: all clean depend dist distclean install uninstall > > > + > > > +libsane-gphoto2.la: gphoto2.lo gphoto2-s.lo $(EXTRA) $(LIBOBJS) > > > + @$(LIBTOOL) $(MLINK) $(CC) -export-dynamic -o $@ $($*_LIBS) \ > > > + $(LDFLAGS) $(GPHOTO2_LIBS) $(BACKENDLIBS) $^ -rpath $(libsanedir) \ > > > + -version-info $(V_MAJOR):$(V_REV):$(V_MINOR) > > > > > > libsane-%.la: %.lo %-s.lo $(EXTRA) $(LIBOBJS) > > > @$(LIBTOOL) $(MLINK) $(CC) -export-dynamic -o $@ $($*_LIBS) \ > > > > What's the reason for the gphoto2 changes and the separate rule for > > building the library? > > There is a specific reason, in that I didn't want to make the whole > sane-backends package dependent from gPhoto2. The IRIX packages are built in > subsystems, and each subsystem have its own set of package dependencies > (called prerequisites in SGI terminology). A given subsystem can be installed > only if all its prerequisistes are satisfied. Differently from RPM (or a > similar package concept), an IRIX package is normally one distribution file (a > .tardist), internally subdivided in subsystems. > In other words, while with RPM you have package.rpm, package-devel.rpm, etc, > with IRIX inst images you have package.tardist, containing all the subsystems > at once (bin, lib, relnotes, man, etc). > > In the case of gPhoto2, without the above modification I would be forced to > make the whole sane-backends package dependent from the gPhoto2 libraries. > That is, the user would be forced to install also the libraries subsystem from > the gPhoto2 packages, even if he/she has no digital camera. Since the only > SANE backend that needs the gPhoto2 libraries is the gPhoto2 backend, I > modified the config rules so that libgphoto2 is only linked with this specific > backend, and not with all the other SANE backends. In this way, I can move the > SANE gPhoto2 backend to a separate subsystem, which depends from the gPhoto2 > libraries. If the user doesn't need the gPhoto2 features, he/she will be > nevertheless able to install the remaining SANE backends without be forced to > install also the gPhoto2 libraries. > > Additionally, depending from the way the runtime linker loader is implemented > in the various OS, forcing the gPhoto2 libraries to be linked with all the > SANE backends could require the load and symbols resolution of that library at > run time (that is, except in the case of the SANE gPhoto2 backend, all the > backends potentially consume more memory than necessary). > > > > diff -ruN sane-backends-1.0.9/backend/as6e.c > > > sane-backends-1.0.9-patched/backend/as6e.c > > > --- sane-backends-1.0.9/backend/as6e.cTue Dec 5 20:10:20 2000 > > > +++ sane-backends-1.0.9-patched/backend/as6e.cThu Dec 12 21:56:54 > > > 2002 > > > @@ -604,8 +604,7 @@ > > > return (SANE_STATUS_GOOD); > > > } /*else */ > > > } > > > - else > > > -return (SANE_STATUS_IO_ERROR); > > > + return (SANE_STATUS_IO_ERROR); > > > } > > > > Is this to fix a warning or is this a real change in code? > > It's just that in the original form the SGI compiler will issue a warning > because it sees the function not returning a value. As I've said, the compiler > can be very picky. You can omit this change if you want, even if avoiding the > unnecessary else makes the code more readable (IMHO; of course ;) > > > > +++ sane-backends-1.0.9-patched/b
[sane-devel] CanoScan D1250U2
I might just be pissing into the wind, but... Any chance of a Sane driver for the CanoScan D1250U2 USB flatbed scanner? Regards, Drew
[sane-devel] Epson 1250u vs plustek-45-TEST5
On Monday 06 January 2003 13:47, Jaeger, Gerhard wrote: >Hi Gene, > >On Sunday, 5. January 2003 21:39, Gene Heskett wrote: >> Hi all; >> >> The artifact is still there, but I have a more pressing problem, >> I've forgotten the location of the focus variable, at 600 dpi, >> I'm seriously out of registration. >> >> Humm, might have found it, the comment says "sensor distance" & >> 16 is way too high for my scanner, so I'm rebuilding it at 8. >> Is that the right setting for your's Reinhart? In which case we >> have a pretty serious production tolerances problem with this >> beast... > >hmpf, that was my fault. In the meantime fixed - 8 is the correct > value. > >> Humm, finished the scan at 600 dpi ok, small piece of the >> original, then segfaulted without showing it to me. And thats >> all it says in the shell when it returned. But I didn't acquire >> a preview first, just sent it to do that same scan again. >> Restart, do preview, get segfault at end of forward scan. I >> sure wish this thing would make up it mind. Restart from icon, >> save prefs (again) first, preview works. Restore teeny size & >> do 600 dpi. Worked, and the registration is now spot on. White >> line artifact still there. > >It is not present here nay longer on my 1260, even the TPA >stuff works now. But the code is not available currently... Post a notice here when it is please :-) >> I don't think this is quite "Ready for prime time" :-( We still >> have that white vertical line artifact, and the segfault at the >> end of the scan seems to be somewhat of a coin toss. Phase of >> the moon, odd/even minute, whatever. > >- phase of the moon! I didn't get any segfaults here after a scan. Now wait a minute, I don't want any MORE poltergeists in my system! With kwin crashing if I'm playing a game and actually win, I don't need any more ghosts. I've also downloaded the latest bugzilla, and installed 20 megs worth of stuff from CPAN that it says it needs, but I still can't file a bugreport against kwin and there does not appear to be any humans at bugs.kde.org to override things. Thats O.T. here, so back to sane/plustek: Whats the appropriate debugging line I should use to turn it on & see if it can be trapped/pinpointed? >> Suggestion/feature request: Can this thing get a focus >> adjustment made available in the gui, and saved in the prefs? >> We no doubt have some users who aren't quite comfortable >> shuffling around in the source code with vi just to get the >> proper focus/registration for their individual scanner, and >> obviously from this, hard coding it isn't going to be optimum >> for everybody. Mine was pretty bad when set for 16, but I >> remembered 8 was pretty good from previous testing, and it still >> is. > >No need to have this adjustment, as it should be okay for all >devices... How did it get reset to 16 then? Possibly for the TPA maybe? But that seems counterintuitive to me, or do positive numbers raise the scanhead, in which case getting into focus for a mounted slide, that setting may be correct. Somehow I had it fixed in my mind that greater numbers meant farther from the glass, not closer. In any event, the TPA is surely going to need a different setting if for no other reason than the thickness of the slide mount frame raising the film off the glass at least far enough to get rid of the newtons rings. Also in that event, the array isn't capable of holding a seperate value for each mode. Fixing that will be a major hack too. :( Which is half the reason I asked for the prefs setting instead, which is probably about the same amount of coding & caffiene in the long run. -- Cheers, Gene AMD K6-III@500mhz 320M Athlon1600XP@1400mhz 512M 99.21% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
[sane-devel] sane 1.0.9 crashes
Gene Heskett writes: > > Now I'm puzzled, Per. The epson kowa backend and the plustek > backend very happily co-exist here. When I start xsane, I get a > choice menu after it does the device scan that lists the available > backends I can use. Just click on/hilight the choice for this > session and click on ok. Yes, but the SANE epson backend and the EPSON KOWA epson backend don't. They silently and mutually clobber one another. You get whatever you installed last :-( -- Olaf MeeuwissenEPSON KOWA Corporation, ECS GnuPG key: 6BE37D90/AB6B 0D1F 99E7 1BF5 EB97 976A 16C7 F27D 6BE3 7D90 Penguin's lib! -- I hack, therefore I am -- LPIC-2
[sane-devel] sane 1.0.9 crashes
peraalr...@t-online.de (Per Aalrust) writes on the Sane Mailinglist: > Henning you were right! I had the Kowa software installed for test > and the sane backend was replaced. Speaking as the current maintainer of EPSON Kowa's "Image Scan! for Linux" (a.k.a. iscan), I know that our package silently clobbers the sane backend and that this is bad. I intend to fix this in a future release by renaming it. # I found out when I tried to install a .deb on my own system: dpkg # just would not let me clobber it without some --force. > > Are you sure you are using the epson backend from SANE 1.0.9 and not > > the Epson software (KOWA)? > > Right this was my problem! I did some experiments with the Epson > Kowa software and therefore the sane backend was replaced. HTH, -- Olaf MeeuwissenEPSON KOWA Corporation, ECS GnuPG key: 6BE37D90/AB6B 0D1F 99E7 1BF5 EB97 976A 16C7 F27D 6BE3 7D90 Penguin's lib! -- I hack, therefore I am -- LPIC-2
[sane-devel] sane 1.0.9 crashes
Hi, Henning you were right! I had the Kowa software installed for test and the sane backend was replaced. > The epson backend maintainer may understand that better, but my > impression is that xscanimage sets the resolution to 301 but it > shouldn't. In fact I'm surprised that xscanimage provides a slider at > all. The epson backend code shows that the backend provides a "word > list" so, xscanimage shouldn't show a slider but a selection menu. Yes it does, if you install clean sane. ;-) > Does xsane show a slider or a selection menu with fixed values for the > resolution? Xsane seems to be a little bit more "intelligent", it offers an option to change to selection menue, when the Kowa backend is installed. Xsane works fine with the Kowa backend. > Are you sure you are using the epson backend from SANE 1.0.9 and not > the Epson software (KOWA)? Right this was my problem! I did some experiments with the Epson Kowa software and therefore the sane backend was replaced. Thanks for help! Bye Per
