On Friday 11 May 2001 07:15 pm, you wrote:
> That is almost certainly not what you wanted, even if it works. It will
> prevent you from using another non-Snapscan scanner or a network scanner.
Hi Nick. I only have one compatible scanner and after the amount of time and
effort I've put in to try to fix whatever broke when I went to 2.4.1 kernel
I'm not sure it's worth it. I certainly don't want to repeat this grief
(three days and counting) just because I change scanners, or go to kernel
2.4.2, or Sane-1.0.5 or some other very minor change.
> It's quite possible that this is a backend problem.
Please explain. I would have thought that since scanimage produces a perfect
color scan then that would indicate the problem is with the frontend,
specifically xscanimage and xsane. Obviously (right?) there is something
different in how they talk to the scanner which baffles me.
> > I thought xscanimage was a frontend to scanimage. Is this not so?
>
> No, scanimage and xscanimage are separate front ends, the only similarity
> is the name and common contributors AFAIK.
It does get confusing when scanimage is a frontend included with the backends
and the actual frontends are seperate altogether. I think you're right.
Scanimage is a command-line frontend scanning utility. Why it's part of the
backends mystifies me but there it is.
Thanks for the input. I'll keep plugging away at this and see what happens.
All the best,
Paul
-- Source code, list archive, and docs: http://www.mostang.com/sane/ To unsubscribe: echo unsubscribe sane-devel | mail majordomo@mostang.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri May 11 2001 - 12:58:22 PDT