> Maybe driver authors use device with [Focus > stacking](
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focus_stacking) ?
> Can it help to have more minutiae?
With these devices the scanned area is so small that not many minutiae can
be found there. I got like 5 o so with my finger and that's what I can
visuall
As you ask, i tried [these
changes](https://github.com/sbechet/libfprint/commit/dd5275f8dcdc24e8d94a3b936516c4242d8bf008)
for a first try with `--enable-debug-log` in configure.
```
$ fprintd-list sbechet
found 1 devices
Device at /net/reactivated/Fprint/Device/0
Using device /net/reactivated/F
Windows driver do multiple cmd 9, then, 403f, then again with this
pattern (I have done one try, i think it can change, with record
quality) :
cmd9*1 then 403f
cmd9*7 then ..
cmd9*7 then ..
*9 then ..
.8
7 7 7 7 7 7 7 1 1 5 7 6 6 6 1 4 7
3. test a fingerprint
cmd9*17 then 403f
Hello,
Le 2017-11-08 19:42, Igor Filatov a écrit :
Maybe you could instead trace the
moment when the device is plugged in separately? Unplug device, start
trace, plug in, stop trace. Then the capture separately: unplug
device, plug in device, wait 5 sec, start trace, unlock with fp, stop
trace.
Hi, I looked into the fprint driver related details.
I have a typical use case where I am going to develop my own fingerprint
sensor device and I am supposed to write up a driver for supporting that
device on Window. I have a few queries:
1. During the development of the driver on Embedded device
