Hi, On Tue, May 20, 2003 at 10:57:22AM -0500, Theodore Kilgore wrote: > At this point (apologies for slowness, but it isn't my scanner) my friend > has run check-usb-scanner on his Artec 1236USB and captured the output to > a log file. Here is the result which unfortunately seems to me rather > negative. > > Of course, it does actually seem to me that "Device Class 0" and > "Interface Class 0" could be obvious lies intended to deceive the > ignorant,
Device Class 0 just means that the type of device is determined by the interface, not the device itsself. That's ok and used by multi-functio-devices and others. Interface class 0 doesn't make much sense but is used by some scanners. > so if check-usb-scanner is depending on the device doing an > accurate self-report about its device class, subclass, and protocol, there > may be a problem there. check-usb-scanner searches for a apttern. Usually all chips of one type follow this pattern. It can't be fooled that easy :-) > Not all devices report themselves truthfully. For > an example, go to the Linux Working USB Devices list (at www.qbik.cz?) and > do a search for Trumpion. You will find there a pocket MP3 player which > lies and says its protocol is Control/Bulk (01) instead of Bulk (50). As there is no "scanner" USB class, the tests are rather specific for these chipsets. It's not possible to write a test program that determines if a USB device is a scanner. > Anyway, here is the output. Thanks, I'll add it to the information in our lists. I really think it's the same scanner as the Artec Ultima 2000 with that 0x4001 id. See the lists for details. The output of cat /proc/bus/usb/devices or sane-find-scanner -v -v may also show some more information. Bye, Henning
