subject:"scanner"

Re: Epson Perfection V19 scanner

2017-11-09 Thread Todd Chester


On 11/09/2017 09:08 AM, Lamar Owen wrote:

On 11/08/2017 06:25 PM, ToddAndMargo wrote:

On 11/07/2017 06:22 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 8:43 PM, ToddAndMargo  
wrote:



And you know the Cxxx series of chipsets have been around
for a while now.  Just not long enough to be out of
production at which point it will appear on Red Hat
compatibility list.


Nonsense. Our friends over at Red Hat are continuously supporting
leading edge *server* hardware. 


Niko!  The C236 chipset *IS* a server grade chipset!
And it has been around for a long time.  No doubt Red Hat
will eventually support it in about five years, which is
typical of them and useless to me.



According to SuperMicro's support matrix for their C236 motherboards at 
http://www.supermicro.com/support/resources/OS/C236.cfm most of their 
C236 motherboards are supported, with some caveats, by RHEL7 (and thus 
CentOS or SL). So the C236 chipset itself is supported by EL7, and has 
been for a while.


But it just so happens that the particular C236-chipset board you used, 
the X11SAE-M, is apparently supported by SuperMicro for EL 7.1, but not 
later.  Now, others with a C236, such as the X11SAT and X11SAT-F, list 
support for 7.2 and 7.3 (the chart hasn't been updated for 7.4).  So you 
bought a motherboard that, for EL7.4, is not supported with that OS by 
SUPERMICRO.  Not Red Hat, but SuperMicro, the manufacturer.  To be 
blunt, but not intended to be harsh, if you want to use EL, do you 
homework and buy a supported board.  (Google-fu: search for the string 
'C236 supermicro support matrix' and this chart is third on the list, 
front page).


I personally have not had that much problem using newer software in 
CentOS 7, thanks to the Software Collections concept and repositories. A 
few things are older, but the latest Chrome works fine, the latest ESR 
Firefox and Thunderbird both work fine, etc. The kernel continues to get 
new hardware drivers backported to it, and it has been pretty stable for 
me (I'm having an issue at the moment with the nVidia binary drivers 
packaged by ELrepo, but that's not a Red Hat thing).


SuperMicro typically has great support for all things Red Hat, but this 
is one of those cases where it just isn't supported; if they could 
support it they would (they being SuperMicro, not Red Hat, since 
SuperMicro has the resources to do that support).  Safer bet is buying a 
Dell, HP, or other server that has as one of its options Red Hat 
Enterprise Linux; Dell especially is very good about this.



Hi Lamar,

I find the hardware compatibility charts to be so wildly out
of date that they are next to useless.  And the problem
occurred across all versions of 7.x that I tested.

I have seen those charts used to "Oops, not on our chart.
Your problem, not ours".  Supermicro's memory charts
terrible for this.  You can't find any of the memory they
certify as it is all out of production.  "Memory
problems?  Not on our chart!"

Also, Red Hat made no complaint about this not being on their
chart, so they expected it to work.  Red Hat L-O-V-E-S
to "WON'T FIX" bug reports.  That would have been an easy
one for them to worm out of.  Instead they pulled the
"we don't have the hardware" when it could have easily been made
available tot them from Supermicro.  They still wormed
out of it, they just had to be a bit more creative.

I also asked Supermicro to remove the X11SAE-M from their Red
Hat table.  I don't know if they did or not.

If you go and read the bug report I made with Red Hat, you will
find that the X11SAE-M worked perfectly when run from
the EXACT same Live USB that I installed it with.  This is
a timing issue.  The Live USB runs slower than native
hard drive.

I though I done complete do diligence. It worked on the Live USB
PERFECTLY.  It only cost me a bit over $1000 in free consulting
to figure it out. I had to completely rip SL 7.x out and replace
everything with Fedora on a running production server  FREE OF
CHARGE. Yup, it did occasionally boot on 7.x.  About one out
of three times (it got worse).  If SL did manage to boot,
it worked perfectly.  Yes, I am still pissed.

RHEL and Clones are great for set and forget (appliance)
applications (if they work initially), but not where on
going innovation is occurring.

And I firmly believe that there is a difference between
assuring stability and procrastination.

-T


--
~~
Computers are like air conditioners.
They malfunction when you open windows
~~

Re: Epson Perfection V19 scanner

2017-11-09 Thread Lamar Owen


On 11/08/2017 06:25 PM, ToddAndMargo wrote:

On 11/07/2017 06:22 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 8:43 PM, ToddAndMargo  
wrote:



And you know the Cxxx series of chipsets have been around
for a while now.  Just not long enough to be out of
production at which point it will appear on Red Hat
compatibility list.


Nonsense. Our friends over at Red Hat are continuously supporting
leading edge *server* hardware. 


Niko!  The C236 chipset *IS* a server grade chipset!
And it has been around for a long time.  No doubt Red Hat
will eventually support it in about five years, which is
typical of them and useless to me.



According to SuperMicro's support matrix for their C236 motherboards at 
http://www.supermicro.com/support/resources/OS/C236.cfm most of their 
C236 motherboards are supported, with some caveats, by RHEL7 (and thus 
CentOS or SL). So the C236 chipset itself is supported by EL7, and has 
been for a while.


But it just so happens that the particular C236-chipset board you used, 
the X11SAE-M, is apparently supported by SuperMicro for EL 7.1, but not 
later.  Now, others with a C236, such as the X11SAT and X11SAT-F, list 
support for 7.2 and 7.3 (the chart hasn't been updated for 7.4).  So you 
bought a motherboard that, for EL7.4, is not supported with that OS by 
SUPERMICRO.  Not Red Hat, but SuperMicro, the manufacturer.  To be 
blunt, but not intended to be harsh, if you want to use EL, do you 
homework and buy a supported board.  (Google-fu: search for the string 
'C236 supermicro support matrix' and this chart is third on the list, 
front page).


I personally have not had that much problem using newer software in 
CentOS 7, thanks to the Software Collections concept and repositories.  
A few things are older, but the latest Chrome works fine, the latest ESR 
Firefox and Thunderbird both work fine, etc. The kernel continues to get 
new hardware drivers backported to it, and it has been pretty stable for 
me (I'm having an issue at the moment with the nVidia binary drivers 
packaged by ELrepo, but that's not a Red Hat thing).


SuperMicro typically has great support for all things Red Hat, but this 
is one of those cases where it just isn't supported; if they could 
support it they would (they being SuperMicro, not Red Hat, since 
SuperMicro has the resources to do that support).  Safer bet is buying a 
Dell, HP, or other server that has as one of its options Red Hat 
Enterprise Linux; Dell especially is very good about this.

Re: Epson Perfection V19 scanner

2017-11-08 Thread ToddAndMargo


On 11/07/2017 06:22 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:

On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 8:43 PM, ToddAndMargo  wrote:

On 11/07/2017 04:59 PM, David Sommerseth wrote:





"Continual Improvement" also means "continual failure". Been there,
done that. Most businesses, and many home users, simply cannot afford
the cost of leading edge technologies.


I can't afford to have my Contacts and Tasks wiped out
by the OS being too out of date to accept fixes and
an OS vendor that won't fix it.  So it works both ways.

And speaking of been there and done that, I see what you
speak of ALL-THE-TIME in the Windows World.  On my Windows VM's,
I disable the updates as I do not have the patience for
the hassles they cause.  (They are hardly ever used and
have limited access to the Internet.  Mostly they are
for research purposes).  So I know from where you come.

And speaking of FUD, why is it the XP is SO dangerous
because it is not supported by M$ and still gets broken into
less that Windows 7?Hmmm.  Marketing guys work on
that one really well!


And you know the Cxxx series of chipsets have been around
for a while now.  Just not long enough to be out of
production at which point it will appear on Red Hat
compatibility list.


Nonsense. Our friends over at Red Hat are continuously supporting
leading edge *server* hardware. 


Niko!  The C236 chipset *IS* a server grade chipset!
And it has been around for a long time.  No doubt Red Hat
will eventually support it in about five years, which is
typical of them and useless to me.


laptop and many business class
chipsets evolve, and hae unannounced upgrades far too frequently, to
expect the same support.


RHEL and Clones are perfect for running a computer as
an appliance, which is what you describe.

My problem is that I have been trying to pound a square peg
into a round hole.  RHEL is a really poor choice for a system
that has a lot of innovation going on on it.

Re: Epson Perfection V19 scanner

2017-11-08 Thread David Sommerseth

On 08/11/17 02:43, ToddAndMargo wrote:
> You are correct.  I am not using EL Linux as it is intended.

You could just have said that instead of all the other rambling.

And _THIS_ is exactly my point when I say "Blue cars are blue" and
claiming you expect them to be orange.  The simple metaphor I use is
about being disappointed that something is not what you expects it to
be.  It is not the blue cars fault at all they are blue; that's how they
were ordered and came from the factory.  If you want an orange car, go
order an orange car instead of insisting the blue one should be orange.

So: Start using RHEL/SL as intended, and you will be happier.  Or use
something else which works as you need.  Complaining and ranting won't
result in any thing.

Do you know why I prefer RHEL/SL 6 or 7 as my primary development
environment?  That's the platforms I'm targeting as the oldest supported
releases.  And that code will run on future major releases of RHEL/SL as
well as the current Fedora releases.  Had I used Fedora 26 for primary
development, I'd be hitting all kinds of challenges when trying to make
this run on RHEL 6 or 7.

So: Adopt your workflow to the environment you want to work within to
reach your goal.  Don't try to adapt the environment to fit your workflow.

And if you reject doing that, well 


(and this is my last reply to this thread)


-- 
kind regards,

David Sommerseth

Re: Epson Perfection V19 scanner

2017-11-07 Thread ToddAndMargo


On 11/07/2017 06:22 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:

Same with Perl 5, although I find very few bugs in
P5 as it is mature.

Perl has has a serious issue with modular dependency hell. You don't
run into it, or run into one update breaking other components, if you
stay within a stable distribution that does serious regression
testing. You also have options to access more recent base versions of
Perl, Python, and other dynamic, highly evolving, and less stable
toolkits by activating the software collections channels.

As you say: Perl 6 is not mature.Even Fedora does not consider it to
be mature for mainline use. If you're out there at that bleeding edge,
well, good luck with anything resembling stability. The CPAN modules,
in particualr, are likely to add new components that solve one
dependency and break previous releases of other modules. pip for
Python, gradle and ant and maven for Java, all share the same problem.
Testing, resolving, and backporting fixes to handle those dependencies
is one futz of a lot of work.



Hi Nico,

I learned programming on Pascal and Modula2.  In
hindsight, C would have been better.  Anyway,
I live and die in Top Down and subroutines.

I jumped to Perl 6 as Perl 5's subroutine declarations
are a freaking nightmare.  Perl 6 is a beautiful clean up
for me.

And you are right, it is bleeding edge.  But I took to
it like a duck to water.  And the developers over on the chat
line are the most incredible fellows.  (So are the guys over
here; no one get their nose out of joint).  So far I have been
able to work around every bug I have tripped across (about 20
so far).

And the programs I have been and are writing are on Fedora
Servers where the anti-kaisen nature of RHEL and Friends
(clones) is not an issue.  I can get problem fixed.

By the way Geany works beautifully over "ssh -X" with no
clipboard issues like you get from xrdp.

The more I learn Perl 6, the more I wonder where it has
been all my life!

And has been pointed out to me on this group, an OS is stable
*ONLY IF* it is stable with what you want it to run on it.

I am loath to rip out SL7.4 as I have it all cherried out
the way I like and I do not have the expenses or time
to rip it out.  I should though as all my new customers
are on Fedora Servers. (The C236 issue and not supporting
new software.)  So I just leave a lot of the annoyances
in place hoping they won't kill me before I dump SL.

The thing about a Kaisen Linux OS is that you do not have to
update it.  At which point you no longer have the constant
new problems introduced.  (The Windows 10 folks are crying
blood over M$'s crazy updates.  What a nightmare.)

The thing about a Kaisen OS is that you have to ask yourself
if the two steps forward is worth the one step backwards.
And figuring THAT out is why the two of us get paid the
medium sized bucks.

I love virtual machines to test new releases.  My VM of
Fedora 27 Beta is sweet -- haven't found any issues it it yet
(the operative word is "yet").

My experience with Fedora is that it more like 10 steps
forward and 1 step backwards.  Lib-notify for example.
I reported it and it got fixed.  It would not have in RHEL
and Clones unless I had a subscription and then maybe it would
have taken several years.  Then again, the issue does not
exist in RHEL and Clones.

The uses you describe for RHEL and Clones sound perfect.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.  (Hell, I still work on
DOS machines.)

In what I use it for, which is a combination Server, Virtual
Machine test bed, and workstation, it is a nightmare.  My
system is the opposite of a set and forget system.  I
still shutter over getting 32 bit Wine to work.

RHEL and Clones are a double edged sword.  It has
its purposes.  I made a big mistake using it as
it does not fit my needs very well.  I have been
trying to pound a square peg into a round hole.

I think when I do finally jump SL for Fedora, the biggest
issue I will have is that I will have lost the support
from the guys on this group.  Their knowledge and willingness
to help are a considerable factor.

-T


--
~~
Computers are like air conditioners.
They malfunction when you open windows
~~

Re: Epson Perfection V19 scanner

2017-11-07 Thread Nico Kadel-Garcia

On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 8:43 PM, ToddAndMargo  wrote:
> On 11/07/2017 04:59 PM, David Sommerseth wrote:

> By the way, I do code in Perl 5 and 6.  EL Linux is
> a nightmare with all its outdated Perl.  Look
> at what I have to do to get a YUM update through:
>
> # yum --skip-broken --exclude perl-libs.otherarch  --exclude net-snmp-libs
> --exclude libsemanage upgrade
>
> Whenever I trip across a bug in Perl6 (and I find a lot of them),
> I tell the developers over on their chat line and in two weeks to a month,
> "dnf upgrade rakudo" (Fedora)
> fixes the issue.
>
> Same with Perl 5, although I find very few bugs in
> P5 as it is mature.

Perl has has a serious issue with modular dependency hell. You don't
run into it, or run into one update breaking other components, if you
stay within a stable distribution that does serious regression
testing. You also have options to access more recent base versions of
Perl, Python, and other dynamic, highly evolving, and less stable
toolkits by activating the software collections channels.

As you say: Perl 6 is not mature.Even Fedora does not consider it to
be mature for mainline use. If you're out there at that bleeding edge,
well, good luck with anything resembling stability. The CPAN modules,
in particualr, are likely to add new components that solve one
dependency and break previous releases of other modules. pip for
Python, gradle and ant and maven for Java, all share the same problem.
Testing, resolving, and backporting fixes to handle those dependencies
is one futz of a lot of work.

> I should NEVER expect this from EL Linux.  This is my fault.
> This is not what EL Linux is meant for.  Need a bug fixed,
> too bad.  This is frozen code.

Nonsense. A bug in an existing release is fixed for their paying
clients. The patch is also tested, and gets evaluated for
compatibility. That's what it takes to have a 10 year stable life span
for a release. If you want to be playing out there in Perl 6 land,
great. But be aware that your efforts cannot be backported slapdash
into a stable environment with paying customers, or people like us who
rely on it for sensitive medical, scientific, or financial work.

> I JUST TRULY adore that fact that some of my Perl code
> works in Fedora but not EL Linux.   HH  

Enjoy. Fedora is where the bugs get hashed out for publication in
RHEL, and get passed along to rebuilds like Scientific Linux and
CentOS.

> I have been turned down for help before as the issues
> in Perl I have tripped across ARE fixed, but not in
> EL Linux.  I have tried removing all of EL Linux's Perl code
> and install the good stuff manually, but I never manage
> to get rid of all the old, bad stuff successfully.  Again,
> my fault for not picking a Kaisen OS.

"Continual Improvement" also means "continual failure". Been there,
done that. Most businesses, and many home users, simply cannot afford
the cost of leading edge technologies.

> And you know the Cxxx series of chipsets have been around
> for a while now.  Just not long enough to be out of
> production at which point it will appear on Red Hat
> compatibility list.

Nonsense. Our friends over at Red Hat are continuously supporting
leading edge *server* hardware. laptop and many business class
chipsets evolve, and hae unannounced upgrades far too frequently, to
expect the same support.

> I just upgraded a CentOS 5 server.  It was over seven years
> old.  It just keeps running and running.  But its was time as things
> were going to start failing hardware wise.  So EL Linux did
> its thing as you described.  But, I need to point out, that
> Fedora would have too, if I had not upgraded.  The Ask Fedora
> folks still yield question on Fedora servers that are very old indeed.

Been there, done that, and it's not as certain as you depict. In
particular, the bleeding edge Fedora installers are quite resource
intensive. They basically don't work without a Gig of RAM, at least:
you might never have been able to install it.

> EL Linux is perfect for a set and forget installation that
> needs to be frozen in place for a lot of years, providing
> your stuff work to start with on it.
>
> Yes RH is a YUGE company and yes they have a lot of
> relationships with vendors.  How do you explain these
> remarks of theirs?

> Giving them Supermicro's phone number and who to talk to
> did not help.

Been there. Done that. Built blade servers for a while. Supermicro
had a real problem with answering the phone, and a *horrible* problem
with refusing to answer questions about BIOS or hardware
configurations. And yes, I helped built the first 8-core blade server
on SuperMicro boards.

> What you describe is not what they practice.  Again,
> this is open source and I can not afford the consulting.
> This is my fault for choosing an Anti-Kaisen OS.

Please. They're hardly "Anti-Kaisen". They are "do not break working systems".

> It is my fault for expecting a Blue Car to have
> all four of its

Re: Epson Perfection V19 scanner

2017-11-07 Thread ToddAndMargo


On 11/07/2017 04:59 PM, David Sommerseth wrote:

On 07/11/17 23:10, ToddAndMargo wrote:

On 11/07/2017 10:09 AM, David Sommerseth wrote:

On 04/11/17 01:14, ToddAndMargo wrote:


I do realize that RHEL is just next to unmaintained code.


Hey, cut the FUD crap please.  And this isn't the first time you come
with such bullshit either.


It is a long running observation and not FUD or bull s***.


I strongly disagree in your observations, when you label the efforts of
producing a rock solid Linux distribution which is designed to survive a
decade long installation.



RHEL is fully maintained and updated according to their release process.
   Bugs and security issues are fixed during the complete life cycle of
each major release.  That is quite far from "unmaintained code".
Insisting on running RHEL 4 today is running unmaintained code.


This is true.  RH has their own proprieties.  One if them is getting
paid for their consulting.  The open source model is such.  And since
I can not afford to put them on my payroll, I am dead last on
getting anything fixed.  (I can barely afford to keep a roof over
my head with this never ending recessions, which has slowly started
to break by has not tricked down to me yet.)


Which gives you even less reasons to complain about what RHEL is and how
it is designed to be as a Linux distribution.


And I did not say "unmaintained code".  I said "next to
unmaintained code".  There is a difference.


And both are wrong in regards to the context of RHEL and how it is
maintained.

[...snip...]


1) It does not operate on modern C236 small business based server
motherboards.  That would be


I do NOT see that being listed here:


Hence, there is NO reason to be surprised here.  To get through the
certification takes lots of efforts, both from Red Hat and the hardware
vendor.  And neither have put efforts into this specific system.

Many years ago, I worked a bit on the test suite which is used for the
RHEL certification.  At that time, it could take up to a week to finish
a complete certification run.  And after that came evaluation of the
results the certification run provided.  That evaluation also indicated
if anything needs to be improved before being certified.


7.2 not compatible with C236 and RSTe motherboard
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1353423
Reported 2016-07-06  (by me)

And if you read the bug report, you will find that their reason
for NOT fixing the issue is that they do not have the hardware
available DESPITE the fact that I told them who to call, phone
number and all, over at Supermicro to get free hardware.


This is probably a way more arrogant and ignorant attitude of you than
you are aware of.  You really don't think Red Hat already have
established vendor relation with Super Micro?  There are 1019 various
certified systems from Super Micro as far as I can see.  It would not
even surprise me if Red Hat have at least one designated hardware
partner contact just for Super Micro.

Red Hat isn't a tiny garage company doing fun stuff.  They're an
enterprise with 10k+ people hired spread over 90 offices across the
world.  How much have you been paid in RHEL subscriptions?  And why
should they focus on your needs when NYSE is on their doorstep asking
for some other and more important hardware to be certified?


So, EVEN IF I WANTED TO, I can not use EL Linux on ANY
new C236 based small business server.  And I reproduced
the issue on two separate server for them.

Why?  Again, because "EL Linux as 'next to unmaintained'".


No.  Not (next to) unmaintained.  UNSUPPORTED due to NOT BEING
CERTIFIED.  You picked the wrong hardware.  Deal with it.

[...snip...]


You ever have the experience of find your business' tasks
and contacts missing when you fire up your machine and
can't figure out why it keeps happening?  (Good thing I am a
back up whore.)  I almost had a heart attack.

Again, because "EL Linux as 'next to unmaintained'".


No.  Because you are using RHEL in an inappropriate and unsupported way.
  You do not accept that the blue car is blue.


3) You get you ass made fun of and requests out right
rejected because you are so out of date.  The folks over on
NMap's list think you are out of your mind for operating
anything that is so out of date and refuse to help you.

Case in point.  Here are two rejections from Simple Scan:

https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=789890
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=789892


Upstream GNOME development IS NOT RHEL package maintenance.  Again, blue
cars are blue.

Before each single package RH ships, either through the various
repositories or as a new minor release, these packages are sent via a
boatload of regression and functional testing.  And then a set of
install/uninstall/reinstall/upgrade/downgrade tests.  This is to ensure
the package has a predictable stability.  I do not say this is flawless
and that updates don't breaks thing ever.  But in the vast

Re: Epson Perfection V19 scanner

2017-11-07 Thread David Sommerseth

On 04/11/17 01:14, ToddAndMargo wrote:
> 
> I do realize that RHEL is just next to unmaintained code.

Hey, cut the FUD crap please.  And this isn't the first time you come
with such bullshit either.

RHEL is fully maintained and updated according to their release process.
 Bugs and security issues are fixed during the complete life cycle of
each major release.  That is quite far from "unmaintained code".
Insisting on running RHEL 4 today is running unmaintained code.

This whining about "it isn't the latest upstream version" is not what
RHEL is about.  And it ignores so much of how RHEL packaging actually
works.  If you want latest versions at all times, you need a bleeding
edge Linux distro (Arch and Gentoo comes to mind, even Fedora or Ubuntu
is not as bleeding edge as those).  Stop complaining about the blue cars
of yours being blue.

I do try to have patience and educate where it is appropriate.  But the
patience eventually has its end too.  When that end arrives, you just
end up being ignored.

-- 
kind regards,

David Sommerseth

Re: Epson Perfection V19 scanner

2017-11-03 Thread ToddAndMargo


On 11/03/2017 04:55 PM, ToddAndMargo wrote:

I posted the follpwing two RFE's:

RFE: save overwrite prompt
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=789890

RFE: delete, save, new scanner
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=789892



And

RFE: please update simple scan
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1509490

RHEL 7.26 maybe?  9.6?

I do realize that RHEL is just next to unmaintained code.
And that the economic model is to give the code away
for free and charge for the consulting.  So, since I
can't afford the consulting, it is unlikely anything I
ask for will ever be worked on.  Oh well ...

Re: Epson Perfection V19 scanner

2017-11-01 Thread Todd Chester


On 10/31/2017 02:53 AM, David Sommerseth wrote:

On 27/10/17 22:03, ToddAndMargo wrote:

On 10/25/2017 12:48 AM, ToddAndMargo wrote:

[...snip...]

So poop.  Now I get to figure out why my scanner takes EIGHT
scans every time I ask for one.  xscan is cumbersome to
use at its best.  I may switch to Simple Scan for most of
everything.  I get tired of having to fix stuff all the
time, but it is my job, so I should quit bitching and
be glad I have a job ...


Generally, I use simple-scan for most of my scans.  If I want really
high quality scans where I want to manipulate the scan in gimp or
similar, then I use xsane.

Depending on the quality settings in XSane, it might do several scans.
And each time you zoom in/out and refresh the preview it will most
commonly also do a re-scan.  So I'd have a closer look at the DPI
settings and quality settings.

But generally, simple-scan does, in my experience, a very decent job -
despite lots of knobs, whistles and bells are hidden or simply not
available.  The most annoying thing for me is that it too often wants to
save the scan as JPEG instead of PDF by default (but not always).  And
that cropping could be set to a default value as well, but setting that
before the first scan will most commonly be kept for the following scans.




I will have a shot at it Thursday.  Thank you for the feed back!

Re: Epson Perfection V19 scanner

2017-10-31 Thread David Sommerseth

On 27/10/17 22:03, ToddAndMargo wrote:
> On 10/25/2017 12:48 AM, ToddAndMargo wrote:
[...snip...]
> So poop.  Now I get to figure out why my scanner takes EIGHT
> scans every time I ask for one.  xscan is cumbersome to
> use at its best.  I may switch to Simple Scan for most of
> everything.  I get tired of having to fix stuff all the
> time, but it is my job, so I should quit bitching and
> be glad I have a job ...

Generally, I use simple-scan for most of my scans.  If I want really
high quality scans where I want to manipulate the scan in gimp or
similar, then I use xsane.

Depending on the quality settings in XSane, it might do several scans.
And each time you zoom in/out and refresh the preview it will most
commonly also do a re-scan.  So I'd have a closer look at the DPI
settings and quality settings.

But generally, simple-scan does, in my experience, a very decent job -
despite lots of knobs, whistles and bells are hidden or simply not
available.  The most annoying thing for me is that it too often wants to
save the scan as JPEG instead of PDF by default (but not always).  And
that cropping could be set to a default value as well, but setting that
before the first scan will most commonly be kept for the following scans.

-- 
kind regards,

David Sommerseth

Re: Epson Perfection V19 scanner

2017-10-27 Thread ToddAndMargo


On 10/25/2017 12:48 AM, ToddAndMargo wrote:

Dear List,

Anyone out there get an Epson Perfection V19 scanner
to work with SL 7.4?  Did you do anything special?

Many thanks,
-T

$ scanimage -L
device 
`imagescan:esci:gt-s650:usb:/sys/devices/pci:00/:00:1a.7/usb1/1-3/1-3:1.0' 
is a EPSON Epson_Perfection_V19


Followup.

1)  I installed the scanner on a native Fedora 26 machine
and it worked.  Well, no so well, but that is the
design of the scanner.  So my issues are software
related and my old scanner was never defective.

2)  I sent the scanner back.  I will not do a "preview" as
it is missing that part in the firmware.  It also is
slower than hell.  I presume this is because it is
USB2 bus powered.  Windows users complain a lot
about these issues too.  The scanner is just too cheap.

So poop.  Now I get to figure out why my scanner takes EIGHT
scans every time I ask for one.  xscan is cumbersome to
use at its best.  I may switch to Simple Scan for most of
everything.  I get tired of having to fix stuff all the
time, but it is my job, so I should quit bitching and
be glad I have a job ...

-T



--
~~
Computers are like air conditioners.
They malfunction when you open windows
~~

Epson Perfection V19 scanner

2017-10-25 Thread ToddAndMargo


Dear List,

Anyone out there get an Epson Perfection V19 scanner
to work with SL 7.4?  Did you do anything special?

Many thanks,
-T

$ scanimage -L
device 
`imagescan:esci:gt-s650:usb:/sys/devices/pci:00/:00:1a.7/usb1/1-3/1-3:1.0' 
is a EPSON Epson_Perfection_V19

Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: scanner

2017-10-12 Thread Paul Robert Marino

  Don't use a smart phone camera for it a decent dedicated digital camera will correct for that optically in the lense, but you are right that is an issue for smart phone cameras due to the physical lense size.Sent from my BlackBerry - the most secure mobile deviceFrom: miles.on...@cirrus.comSent: October 12, 2017 5:52 PMTo: prmari...@gmail.com; jason.bron...@gmail.com; scientific-linux-users@fnal.govSubject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: scanner  On 10/12/2017 04:42 PM, Paul Robert
  Marino wrote:

  
  
  
 Interestingly my
  father threw me for a loop on this now a days a low grade
  digital camera actually has higher resolution than most
  scanners so he uses one in a photo copy stand and then just
  copies the one file to his computer via a bluetooth enabled SD
  card which is faster than any scanner on the market. Then he
  uses gimp or photos of depending on which computer he is using
  to crop it and convert the format if need.
He
  told me this actually works faster and easier than any scanner
  he has ever used and gets higher resolution as well and
  requires no drivers. All you need is a photo copy stand which
  is a rig you attach your camera to the holds it level to a
  surface.
Its
  a fascinating idea and I'm sure he is right about it, and it's
  probably the way I'm going to do it in the future.
  

That seems like it would introduce distortion, as the document edges
would be farther from the camera lens than the document center. Kind
of like most selfies make your nose look bigger.

No it would not produce parallax that the is the point of using a photo copy stand. That is how Profesional photographers have been copying photographs without the negatives since the beginning of photography it's a rig designed to prevent exactly that.Now the down side is a good photo copy stand is expensive ($400+) but the one he is using actually originally belonged to his father. Really good ones are a one time high quality investment that will out last you, but you can get cheap ones (less than $50) that will last a decade or more of constant use too.Sent from my BlackBerry - the most secure mobile deviceFrom: positiv...@gmx.comSent: October 12, 2017 5:51 PMTo: prmari...@gmail.comCc: jason.bron...@gmail.com; scientific-linux-users@fnal.govSubject: Re: scanner A single point of imaging would produce paralax -- if that matters.

Otherwise , an efficient 'hack' .

On the plus side , could 'scan' a non-flat object.

Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2017 at 5:42 PM
From: "Paul Robert Marino" <prmari...@gmail.com>
To: "Jason Bronner" <jason.bron...@gmail.com>, scientific-linux-users <scientific-linux-users@fnal.gov>
Subject: Re: scanner

Interestingly my father threw me for a loop on this now a days a low grade digital camera actually has higher resolution than most scanners so he uses one in a photo copy stand and then just copies the one file to his computer via a bluetooth enabled SD card which is faster than any scanner on the market. Then he uses gimp or photos of depending on which computer he is using to crop it and convert the format if need.

He told me this actually works faster and easier than any scanner he has ever used and gets higher resolution as well and requires no drivers. All you need is a photo copy stand which is a rig you attach your camera to the holds it level to a surface.

Its a fascinating idea and I'm sure he is right about it, and it's probably the way I'm going to do it in the future.

Sent from my BlackBerry - the most secure mobile device

From: jason.bron...@gmail.com

Sent: October 12, 2017 5:26 PM

To: scientific-linux-users@fnal.gov

Subject: Re: scanner

I'm currently using an older Epson Perfection with a reasonable degree of success. HP is probably going to be your best bet for any kind of stable use and long term support, though. It'll function correctly on about anything until the unit dies from mechanical failure.

Virus-free. www.avg.com

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 1:50 PM, David Sommerseth <sl+us...@lists.topphemmelig.net> wrote:

On 12/10/17 17:31, ToddAndMargo wrote:
> Dear List,
>
> Anyone have a favorite flat bed scanner that is SL friendly?

I've only had MFPs the last 10 years or so, with printer and scanner
integrated. These are my general experiences on a few brands

- Canon
Horrendous Linux support, network scanning basically impossible. USB
scanning may work reasonably okay.

- Brother
Functional Linux drivers (also on RHEL), cumbersome setup but once
done even network scanning works reasonably well.

- HP
One of the best driver packages I've used. Newest hardware can be
tricky and may require building hplip package manually. But the web
page is quite good at listing which driver version is required.
Network scanning works very well, even AFP with duplex scanning. And
for USB scanning, this works also very well.

Downside: requires a binary plug-in to be installed post driver
install. This is basically a required closed source/proprietary
firmware to enable scanning. This can be installed both via the hplip
command line and GUI tools.

I'd recommend a HP MFP device any time. If you can find an older model
on sale, you'll get big bang for the bucks with a big chance it will
work out of the box once the hplip packages are installed.

--
kind regards,

David Sommerseth

Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: scanner

2017-10-12 Thread O'Neal, Miles


On 10/12/2017 04:42 PM, Paul Robert Marino wrote:
Interestingly my father threw me for a loop on this now a days a low 
grade digital camera actually has higher resolution than most scanners 
so he uses one in a photo copy stand and then just copies the one file 
to his computer via a bluetooth enabled SD card which is faster than 
any scanner on the market. Then he uses gimp or photos of depending on 
which computer he is using to crop it and convert the format if need.
He told me this actually works faster and easier than any scanner he 
has ever used and gets higher resolution as well and requires no 
drivers. All you need is a photo copy stand which is a rig you attach 
your camera to the holds it level to a surface.
Its a fascinating idea and I'm sure he is right about it, and it's 
probably the way I'm going to do it in the future.
That seems like it would introduce distortion, as the document edges 
would be farther from the camera lens than the document center. Kind of 
like most selfies make your nose look bigger.

Re: scanner

2017-10-12 Thread Paul Robert Marino

  Interestingly my father threw me for a loop on this now a days a low grade digital camera actually has higher resolution than most scanners so he uses one in a photo copy stand and then just copies the one file to his computer via a bluetooth enabled SD card which is faster than any scanner on the market. Then he uses gimp or photos of depending on which computer he is using to crop it and convert the format if need.He told me this actually works faster and easier than any scanner he has ever used and gets higher resolution as well and requires no drivers. All you need is a photo copy stand which is a rig you attach your camera to the holds it level to a surface.Its a fascinating idea and I'm sure he is right about it, and it's probably the way I'm going to do it in the future.Sent from my BlackBerry - the most secure mobile deviceFrom: jason.bron...@gmail.comSent: October 12, 2017 5:26 PMTo: scientific-linux-users@fnal.govSubject: Re: scanner  I'm currently using an older Epson Perfection with a reasonable degree of success. HP is probably going to be your best bet for any kind of stable use and long term support, though. It'll function correctly on about anything until the unit dies from mechanical failure.
Virus-free. www.avg.com
		On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 1:50 PM, David Sommerseth <sl+us...@lists.topphemmelig.net> wrote:On 12/10/17 17:31, ToddAndMargo wrote:
> Dear List,
>
>    Anyone have a favorite flat bed scanner that is SL friendly?

I've only had MFPs the last 10 years or so, with printer and scanner
integrated.  These are my general experiences on a few brands

- Canon
  Horrendous Linux support, network scanning basically impossible.  USB
  scanning may work reasonably okay.

- Brother
  Functional Linux drivers (also on RHEL), cumbersome setup but once
  done even network scanning works reasonably well.

- HP
  One of the best driver packages I've used.  Newest hardware can be
  tricky and may require building hplip package manually.  But the web
  page is quite good at listing which driver version is required.
  Network scanning works very well, even AFP with duplex scanning.  And
  for USB scanning, this works also very well.

  Downside: requires a binary plug-in to be installed post driver
  install.  This is basically a required closed source/proprietary
  firmware to enable scanning.  This can be installed both via the hplip
  command line and GUI tools.

I'd recommend a HP MFP device any time.  If you can find an older model
on sale, you'll get big bang for the bucks with a big chance it will
work out of the box once the hplip packages are installed.


--
kind regards,

David Sommerseth

Re: scanner

2017-10-12 Thread Jason Bronner

I'm currently using an older Epson Perfection with a reasonable degree of
success. HP is probably going to be your best bet for any kind of stable
use and long term support, though. It'll function correctly on about
anything until the unit dies from mechanical failure.

<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail>
Virus-free.
www.avg.com
<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail>
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 1:50 PM, David Sommerseth <
sl+us...@lists.topphemmelig.net> wrote:

> On 12/10/17 17:31, ToddAndMargo wrote:
> > Dear List,
> >
> >Anyone have a favorite flat bed scanner that is SL friendly?
>
> I've only had MFPs the last 10 years or so, with printer and scanner
> integrated.  These are my general experiences on a few brands
>
> - Canon
>   Horrendous Linux support, network scanning basically impossible.  USB
>   scanning may work reasonably okay.
>
> - Brother
>   Functional Linux drivers (also on RHEL), cumbersome setup but once
>   done even network scanning works reasonably well.
>
> - HP
>   One of the best driver packages I've used.  Newest hardware can be
>   tricky and may require building hplip package manually.  But the web
>   page is quite good at listing which driver version is required.
>   Network scanning works very well, even AFP with duplex scanning.  And
>   for USB scanning, this works also very well.
>
>   Downside: requires a binary plug-in to be installed post driver
>   install.  This is basically a required closed source/proprietary
>   firmware to enable scanning.  This can be installed both via the hplip
>   command line and GUI tools.
>
> I'd recommend a HP MFP device any time.  If you can find an older model
> on sale, you'll get big bang for the bucks with a big chance it will
> work out of the box once the hplip packages are installed.
>
>
> --
> kind regards,
>
> David Sommerseth
>

Re: scanner

2017-10-12 Thread Jos Vos

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 08:31:05AM -0700, ToddAndMargo wrote:

>Anyone have a favorite flat bed scanner that is SL friendly?

Look at HP All-in-One devices.  I've used several models with
"HP OfficeJet Pro" in the model name.  I only use the scan function
and it's working fine with Xsane, also the ADF (when available).

Loot at a list of supported devices:

http://hplipopensource.com/hplip-web/supported_devices/index.html

I'm using them with Fedora, SL / CentOS will have older versions
of the "hplip" software, so look at the required versions.

-- 
--Jos Vos <j...@xos.nl>
--X/OS Experts in Open Systems BV   |   Office: +31 20 6938364
--Amsterdam, The Netherlands|   Mobile: +31 6 26216181

Re: [EXTERNAL] scanner

2017-10-12 Thread O'Neal, Miles

I have an ancient HP SCSI scanner (from 1996 or so). If 300DPI hardware 
scan is sufficient, it's excellent. A bit slow, but great scans. The 
foam under the lid recently disintegrated; I need to decide whether to 
refurb or get something that does 600DPI (which I occasionally need).


Nothing fancy, but rock solid. Has worked with SANE forever.

On 10/12/2017 10:31 AM, ToddAndMargo wrote:

Dear List,

   Anyone have a favorite flat bed scanner that is SL friendly?

Many thanks,
-T



--
Miles O'Neal
CAD Systems Engineer
Cirrus Logic | cirrus.com | 1.512.851.4659

scanner

2017-10-12 Thread ToddAndMargo


Dear List,

   Anyone have a favorite flat bed scanner that is SL friendly?

Many thanks,
-T

61 matches

Mail list logo