Subject: Re: sane-backends-1.0.12 vs. USB scanners
To: None <netbsd-users@NetBSD.org>
From: Bruce J.A. Nourish <bjan+netbsd-users@bjan.net>
List: netbsd-users
Date: 08/03/2003 08:17:27
On Sun, Aug 03, 2003 at 04:48:09PM +0000, Matthias Scheler wrote:
> But according to ktrace(1) "xsane" doesn't even try to open "/dev/uscanner0".
> Here is the debugging output:
> 
> [plustek] drvopen()
> [plustek] usbDev_open(/dev/uscanner0,0x04B8-0x011D)
> [plustek] open failed: -1
> [plustek] sane_get_devices (0xbfbfedac, 0)
> [plustek] sane_exit
> 
> It looks like "libusb" is rejecting the open call. Any help how to make this
> work would be appreciated.

It would be handy to have ktrace output to see exactly what was going on.

One thing I will say is that (if this is the same libusb as found on 
Linux) libusb directly accesses the USB bus, circumventing the whole
/dev/uscanner* buisness. On Linux it does this through /proc (!!), I
don't know how it does so on NetBSD.

I remember having to hack sane-backends in order to get my mother's 
Benq scanner to work on Linux. I don't have a scanner on my NetBSD
machine, nor do I have any experience with epson scanners. You
might try other mailing lists related to SANE.

-- 
Bruce J.A. Nourish <bjan+JUNK@bjan.net>