On Thursday, December 08, 2011 11:52:34 AM m. allan noah wrote: > skip xsane for a minute. what about scanimage -L
# scanimage -L No scanners were identified. ... # sane-find-scanner ... found USB scanner (vendor=0x138a, product=0x0007) at libusb:003:004 # Your USB scanner was (probably) detected. It may or may not be supported by # SANE. Try scanimage -L and read the backend's manpage. On Thursday, December 08, 2011 03:36:59 PM you wrote: > Educated guess: your libsane is really libsane-v4l and not libsane-dll. Don't seem to have a libsane-dll anywhere in /usr. Do have libsane-v4l.la, .so.1, and .so.1.0.22 in /usr/lib32/sane and /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/sane . > Other possibility: /usr/lib/sane is in ld.so.conf which it shouldn't. /etc/ld.so.conf only has: include /etc/ld.so.conf.d/*.conf ... and /etc/ld.so.conf.d only has files named: libc.conf x86_64-linux-gnu.conf zz_i386-biarch-compat.conf Both machines are running the most current Debian Testing 64bit. Didn't build from source; did a network install. > Most Linux distributions get these points right these days. If you've > built from source though, there's a good chance that the first issue is > at play here. Make sure that you /usr/lib/libsane.so.1.0.22 is the same > as your /usr/lib/sane/libsane-dll.so.1.0.22. Don't have a /usr/lib/libsane.so* or /usr/lib/sane/libsane-dll.so* on either machine. Neither also in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/sane or anything relevant in /usr/local/lib in either machine.
