Hi,
On Sun, Sep 01, 2002 at 10:02:07PM +0200, abel deuring wrote:
> currently there is no way to change the timeout value programatically.
> (one more issue that should be fixed in Sane 2) I think that increasing
> the default timeout value is not a problem, unless we return to the
> _really_ l
Henning Meier-Geinitz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, Sep 01, 2002 at 10:02:07PM +0200, abel deuring wrote:
>
>>currently there is no way to change the timeout value programatically.
>>(one more issue that should be fixed in Sane 2) I think that increasing
>>the default timeout value is not a problem,
Hi all,
I'm trying to use the Sane module from PIL (Python Imaging Library;
http://www.pythonware.com/products/pil/ ) After some fights with the
installation, I can start a scan, but the method snap() segfaults. As
far as I understand it, the device object does not allocate the buffer
that sto
Hi,
On Sun, Sep 01, 2002 at 04:45:08PM -0400, Matto Marjanovic wrote:
>
> >> Hmm... and the more I look at this, the less I understand what the
> >> SANE_STATUS_INVAL case is for. (The microtek backend is blocking-mode
> >> exclusively, so I've never really dealt with this) What does
Henning Meier-Geinitz wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I got a report from a Mustek scanner user who can't use his scanner
> since SANE 1.0.7. The SCSI bus resets during the lamp warm-up.
>
> The logfiles show that calibration sometimes take more than 60
> seconds. That's the timeout set in sanei_scsi.c sinc
Hi all,
I got a report from a Mustek scanner user who can't use his scanner
since SANE 1.0.7. The SCSI bus resets during the lamp warm-up.
The logfiles show that calibration sometimes take more than 60
seconds. That's the timeout set in sanei_scsi.c since 1.0.7.
I use a similar scanner and had s
Hi,
On Sun, Sep 01, 2002 at 03:07:13PM -0400, Matto Marjanovic wrote:
>
> >* strictly speaking sane_set_io_mode() should return SANE_STATUS_GOOD
> > for non_blocking == SANE_FALSE, at least that's what the standard
> > says. I guess nobody will ever notice...
>
> A suggestion for a very tin
Hi
We changed over from crashintoshes 2 years ago now at our small photo studio.
All the Epson scanners seem work out of the box with SuSE 8.0. (but not the
supermarket ones: 1250 I think) I have a 1660 and an old 640 as well as a
Umax Astra scsi. The Epsons are faster and better quality. Hope
Hi,
On Sun, Sep 01, 2002 at 09:19:29AM -0600, Dwight Tovey wrote:
> For that reason I think that I
> will probably want a scanner with a USB interface to make it easier to
> move the scanner between systems when necessary.
If I bouhght a new scanner now, I would also choose USB.
> I do have an A
Hi David,
thank's for the patch. I just applied it.
Bye
Peter
David Paschal wrote:
> Hi. Attached is a patch to remove OfficeJet support from the SANE "hp"
> backend and documentation, now that I have made a stable release of the
> new "hpoj" backend (http://hpoj.sourceforge.net), which suppo
Alan & Lori Smith wrote:
> I would like to think it is something that simple - but I have received
> the same results with three different SCSI cards and three different
> cables.
> I also get the same results with the terminator on or off, and with all
> variations of the SCSI bios settings. A
>> Hmm... and the more I look at this, the less I understand what the
>> SANE_STATUS_INVAL case is for. (The microtek backend is blocking-mode
>> exclusively, so I've never really dealt with this) What does
>> "image acquistion is pending" mean? Is that before or after sane_start()
Alan & Lori Smith wrote:
> I have a Umax Astra 1200S that I am using with an Initio 9100A SCSI card
> under Mandrake 8.2. I have no trouble seeing the scanner (using
> sane-find-scanner) and it is recognized properly by xscanimage. The
> problem is that it locks up scanimage or xscanimage wh
>* strictly speaking sane_set_io_mode() should return SANE_STATUS_GOOD
> for non_blocking == SANE_FALSE, at least that's what the standard
> says. I guess nobody will ever notice...
A suggestion for a very tiny edit in the API docs:
4.3.12 sane_set_io_mode
...
This function may fail
On Sunday 01 September 2002 11:19, Dwight Tovey wrote:
>I'm sure I just heard a collective groan from the list as yet
> another newbie asks for a basic recommendation. But after
> looking through the archives a bit it looked like the only
> recommendations recently have been about film scanners, s
--FCuugMFkClbJLl1L
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
It's hard for me to be impartial, I am responsible for the EPSON=20
backend, I have five EPSON scanners, and I think they are
simply the best ... :-)
With that out
I would like to think it is something that simple - but I have received
the same results with three different SCSI cards and three different cables.
I also get the same results with the terminator on or off, and with all
variations of the SCSI bios settings. Also, all three cards and cables
wor
I'm sure I just heard a collective groan from the list as yet another
newbie asks for a basic recommendation. But after looking through the
archives a bit it looked like the only recommendations recently have
been about film scanners, so I thought I would ask again.
I'll admit to being fairly ign
Alan & Lori Smith schrieb:
>
> I have a Umax Astra 1200S that I am using with an Initio 9100A SCSI card
> under Mandrake 8.2. I have no trouble seeing the scanner (using
> sane-find-scanner) and it is recognized properly by xscanimage. The
> problem is that it locks up scanimage or xscanimage wh
19 matches
Mail list logo
