Hello to all of you, my name is Jens Plonka and I bought a Tevion MD4266 flat bed scanner some years ago at ALDI Sued. Until now ther wasn't much need for me to spend any Idear of backend support for Linux. Till now!
Currently I've loged the USB communikation for a basic setup of the backend including: * Resolution * Brightness * Kontrast * Clipare * Colormode (24Bit Color, 8Bit Gray and 1Bit Monochrome) And downloaded the latest CVS snapshot and managed to get the scanner identifyed ba scanimage -L with a new branch of the sm3840 backend named md42666 (currently not send to CVS). Right now I faild to contact Microtek to get any information about the equal ScanMaker 5800. Can you please inform me about any equivalent activities to one of the two scanners? Thanks a lot With best regards Jens Plonka -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/sane-devel/attachments/20070320/6c0c7d66/attachment.htm From kitno...@gmail.com Tue Mar 20 15:01:39 2007 From: kitno...@gmail.com (m. allan noah) Date: Tue Mar 20 14:01:47 2007 Subject: [sane-devel] Re: [PATCH] generate hal fdi file In-Reply-To: <87y7ls17v0....@sonic.technologeek.org> References: <1172884934.2639.99.ca...@zelda.fubar.dk> <1172885247.2639.104.ca...@zelda.fubar.dk> <1174158956.2691.91.ca...@zelda.fubar.dk> <87d536vqwv....@sonic.technologeek.org> <1174357011.2666.49.ca...@zelda.fubar.dk> <87y7ls17v0....@sonic.technologeek.org> Message-ID: <97246d0e0703200701p301d2f6n5e3a504fd4977...@mail.gmail.com> On 3/20/07, Julien BLACHE <j...@jblache.org> wrote: > David Zeuthen <da...@fubar.dk> wrote: > > Hi, > > > So I'm curious if a) you think this is a good idea; and b) whether such > > a patch would be able to go into mainline SANE? Thanks for considering! > > Looks good to me, as long as the added code in SANE is propery > #ifdef'd out etc. Let's try not to turn SANE into a Linux-specific > piece of code :) > > Also, how do you manage different HAL versions ? Is the HAL plugin API > stable ? > > What would be the impact in terms of: > - added code > - added library dependencies (and here I'm especially worried about > bringing in the infamous GLib for the DBus stuff in dll.c, so if we > could avoid it, that'd be nice) > it would be nice if some of the linux gnome devels would engage in SANE discussions on the SANE lists. they might learn something about the hardware they are trying to support :) button handling comes up here quite a bit, you should search the archives of the sane-devel and sane-standard mailing lists. it is clear that there is a growing desire to do something, but the complexity of the problem, and the variety of scanners will make the approach you outlined more difficult. 1. you need a piece of code that understands the button-reading protocol for every scanner that sane supports. you will end up replicating a fair bit of code that is already (hopefully) in sane-backends, esp. for devices that require a bit of initialization before they can communicate. 2. what happens when the user fires up scanimage command line tool without pressing any buttons? how do we deal with the contention for the device? allan -- "The truth is an offense, but not a sin"
