and many thanks to Henning for showing me the many troubleshooting steps I
could take.
Cheers,
Keith
On Thu, 10 Jun 2004, Oliver Rauch wrote:
> Am Don, 2004-06-10 um 17.32 schrieb Keith Clayton:
> > No, still running 0.90 on the windows box. I upgraded to 0.94 on the
> > linux box a
a way with the published binaries because they are compiled as GUI.
>
> BTW. Did you ever test xsane-0.94-win32?
>
> Oliver
>
> Am Don, 2004-06-10 um 16.09 schrieb Keith Clayton:
> > What sort of steps are availble for me to take debugging-wise on the
> > windows end?
>
I don't know much about windows side either. Guess I'll plug away a bit
and see if I can coax some debug output out of xsane
Cheers,
Keith
On Thu, 10 Jun 2004, Henning Meier-Geinitz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Jun 10, 2004 at 07:09:36AM -0700, Keith Clayton wrote:
> &g
d, Jun 09, 2004 at 09:18:11PM -0700, Keith Clayton wrote:
> > Hate when I do that . . here's the xsane logs described in my previous
> > email
>
> Ok, let's look at the second log. The preview scan looks ok (but I
> don't know the details of the plustek backend). The
--=-LXWa6OL6bN8i+5klQC12
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hate when I do that . . here's the xsane logs described in my previous
email
--=-LXWa6OL6bN8i+5klQC12
Content-Disposition: attachment;
filename=xsane_previewscan_regscan_die_log.txt.gz
Content-Type: application/x-g
pe my
description is clear enough.
Sorry took me a couple of days to get back on this. Lots of life the
past couple of days
Cheers,
Keith
On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 18:01 +0200, Henning Meier-Geinitz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 08:55:55AM -0700, Keith Clayton wrot
es is a holiday ?!? Heh,
heh
On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 17:40 +0200, Henning Meier-Geinitz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 08:31:51AM -0700, Keith Clayton wrote:
> > On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 10:52 +0200, Henning Meier-Geinitz wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > >
--=-1b4qrM9kqOVj64F7W2sL
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 10:52 +0200, Henning Meier-Geinitz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, Jun 06, 2004 at 10:27:57AM -0700, Keith Clayton wrote:
> > No seg fault on the saned end. Its happily running, wa
ndows machine more. I can do a tcpdump capture of the
communication if that would be helpful.
K
On Sun, 6 Jun 2004, Henning Meier-Geinitz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, Jun 05, 2004 at 11:00:23AM -0700, Keith Clayton wrote:
> > scanimage -d net:localhost:plustek works perfectly. Can sc
In my case, w/problems scanning from win32-xsane across the network using
an Epson Perfection 1250, I commented out all backends except net and
plustek from dll.conf.
This had no impact on my problem, where I could
sucessfully scan once but then the scanner is left in an unusable state
and and add
got any other suggestions, let me know and I'll
give it a shot.
Thanks!
Keith
On Sat, 2004-06-05 at 12:02 +0200, Henning Meier-Geinitz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, May 31, 2004 at 10:52:11AM -0700, Keith Clayton wrote:
> > I'm at a bit of a loss as to how I can troubleshoot
Probably want to start by checking into the meaning of this error
usbdevfs: USBDEVFS_BULK failed dev 2 ep 0x81 len 4096 ret -71
I did some google-ing around without much success . . maybe ask the
usb-devel list.
You may also want to try the other uhci module. IIRC, there are 2
possible modules
Hi everyone,
Having a problem scanning across the network with win32-xsane.
First off, setup of the server machine.
PPC box w/2.4.26, sane-backends-1.0.14 and epson perfection 1250.
libusb-0.1.7, xinetd-2.3.12
Using xsane-0.93 on the PPC/linux box locally, I can scan just fine.
Everything is wo
of it.
Thanks for any help anyone can give
Cheers,
Keith
--=20
<><><><><><><><><><><><>
Keith Clayton
ke...@claytons.org
"If you don't trust me with your source code,
why shoul
14 matches
Mail list logo
