Re: Using NET backend

David Mosberger-Tang (David.Mosberger@acm.org)
Thu, 14 May 1998 22:58:55 -0700

>>>>> On Thu, 14 May 1998 09:00:16 -0700, Jeff Freedman <jsf@hevanet.com> said:

Jeff> I'm trying out the "net" backend of the .72 release with a
Jeff> Microtek E3, Adaptec 2940, and Redhat Linux 5.0. It starts to
Jeff> work (in the "Preview" dialog of xscanimage); but after what
Jeff> seems like one pass, xscanimage freezes up. From then on, the
Jeff> scanner is unusable until I reboot. If I try "scanimage -L",
Jeff> scanimage just hangs until I kill it.

Jeff> Scanimage works fine if I use the Microtek backend directly.

I just (re-)tested it with the Mustek backend and all is fine here.
When writing the Mustek backend, I found that scanning through saned
uncovered some bugs in the Mustek that did not show up in testing with
scanimage or xscanimage. As a result, I'd highly recommend testing a
backend through saned as it will increase the likelihood that the
backend does indeed work according to the SANE API spec.

I'm not saying this is necessarily a bug in the Microtek backend, but
just because it works with scanimage doesn't prove that it's a bug in
the net backend or in saned either. Maybe you can try to use
SANE_DEBUG_NET=128 on the client side and/or "saned -d 128" on the
server side to try to track the problem down?

--david

--
Source code, list archive, and docs: http://www.mostang.com/sane/
To unsubscribe: echo unsubscribe sane-devel | mail majordomo@mostang.com