Dieter Jurzitza writes:
> Hi Olaf,
> dear listmembers,
> what regards your suggestion with the syntax: fine with me. So to say (for my
> 6300C)
>
> vendorID=HP
> productID=C7670A
>
> so we wouldn't have even one new name but would have a different meaning
> between SCSI and USB devices.
>
> so,
Dieter Jurzitza wrote:
Hi,
> Your suggestion would be: 1 new keyword ":scsi" and write
>
> :scsi "HP" "C7670A" "processor"
>
> if I caught up with you. That'll be fine. Even more: it should be simple to
> use the very same scan mechanism as is used for USB devices, the only
> exchange is ":usb
Dieter Jurzitza writes:
> Hi folks,
> nothing lives so long as the change does. Tonight I received a report
> regarding an Epson scanner promoting itself as "processor", hence I had to
> modify my patch in order to process this correctly.
There's probably a few more but I don't have a list :-(
Hi Olaf,
dear listmembers,
what regards your suggestion with the syntax: fine with me. So to say (for my
6300C)
vendorID=HP
productID=C7670A
so we wouldn't have even one new name but would have a different meaning
between SCSI and USB devices.
so, maybe even drop the ":scsi" identifier but wri
Hi folks,
nothing lives so long as the change does. Tonight I received a report
regarding an Epson scanner promoting itself as "processor", hence I had to
modify my patch in order to process this correctly.
All other deficiencies remained "as is". If this patch is taken for serious
as "acceptab
