On Fri, Sep 18, 1998 at 09:48:26AM -1000, Scott J. Kramer wrote:
> On Fri, 18-Sep-1998 @ 16:07, Bernd Schroeder wrote:
> > Subject: Re: Microtek V300, anyone?
>
> [...]
>
> > Please download one of the files in
> >
> > ftp://ftp.muc.de/people/bernds/mtek2
> >
> > with a version 0.4 or higher. Maybe, that the V300 works with them. If
> > not, please send me a trace with SANE_DEBUG_MICROTEK2 set to 30.
>
> Greetings Bernd and other SANErs,
>
> I'm interested in purchasing a SANE-capable scanner and am unsure if
> the Microtek X6EL (currently my first choice) will work. Does anyone
> have any reports of whether or not the microtek2 backend works with
> that model? This is the only information I could find in the list
> archives:
Probably there is nobody up to now, who has this model working with sane.
But I have a version of the backend, that, according to the reports of
some few people, works to a reasonable degree with a ScanMaker 636, which,
according to the specifications, is more or less the same as the X6EL.
So, perhaps it is possible to get the X6EL running with sane with some
little changes to the backend.
But, I am a bit surprised of the output of the cdrecord program:
> Vendor_info : ' 'Identifikation : 'Scanner '
^^^^^^^^
This vendor string is typical for Microtek scanners.
> Revision : '1.40'
All other revisions, that I have seen so far, are either *.00, *.10 or *.11 .
> Device seems to be: Microtek MS300A.
All model names, that I know, have the string '[Ss]canner' in their names.
This doesn't necessarily mean anything, but there might be subtle
differences to other models in other parts of the backend, too.
Bernd
-- Bernd Schroeder Email: mailto:bernd@aquila.muc.de PGP public key available: mailto:pgp@aquila.muc.de | Subject: send key
-- Source code, list archive, and docs: http://www.mostang.com/sane/ To unsubscribe: echo unsubscribe sane-devel | mail majordomo@mostang.com