sane-project-website/old-archive/1999-04/0287.html

<!-- received="Wed Apr 21 11:30:01 1999 PDT" -->
<!-- sent="Wed, 21 Apr 1999 19:28:57 +0100 (BST)" -->
<!-- name="Nick Lamb" -->
<!-- email="njl98r@ecs.soton.ac.uk" -->
<!-- subject="Re: PNM backend (was Segfaults in 1.01-pre ...)" -->
<!-- id="" -->
<!-- inreplyto="199904210428.VAA32546@panda.mostang.com" -->
<title>sane-devel: Re: PNM backend (was Segfaults in 1.01-pre ...)</title>
<h1>Re: PNM backend (was Segfaults in 1.01-pre ...)</h1>
<b>Nick Lamb</b> (<a href="mailto:njl98r@ecs.soton.ac.uk"><i>njl98r@ecs.soton.ac.uk</i></a>)<br>
<i>Wed, 21 Apr 1999 19:28:57 +0100 (BST)</i>
<p>
<ul>
<li> <b>Messages sorted by:</b> <a href="date.html#287">[ date ]</a><a href="index.html#287">[ thread ]</a><a href="subject.html#287">[ subject ]</a><a href="author.html#287">[ author ]</a>
<!-- next="start" -->
<li> <b>Next message:</b> <a href="0288.html">Tripp Lilley: "Re: PNM backend (was Segfaults in 1.01-pre ...)"</a>
<li> <b>Previous message:</b> <a href="0286.html">Oliver Rauch: "Re: 2 Channel SCSI Card"</a>
<li> <b>In reply to:</b> <a href="0281.html">David Mosberger-Tang: "Re: Sane 1.01pre5 segfaults in RedHat 5.1 (net)"</a>
<!-- nextthread="start" -->
<li> <b>Next in thread:</b> <a href="0292.html">Milon Firikis: "Re: Sane 1.01pre5 segfaults in RedHat 5.1 (net)"</a>
<!-- reply="end" -->
</ul>
<!-- body="start" -->
On Tue, 20 Apr 1999, David Mosberger-Tang wrote:<br>
<p>
<i>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; On Tue, 20 Apr 1999 18:40:28 +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen &lt;<a href="mailto:pere@hungry.com">pere@hungry.com</a>&gt; said:</i><br>
<i>&gt; </i><br>
<i>&gt;   Petter&gt; The pnm backend is supposed to be full of bugs.  Maybe you</i><br>
<i>&gt;   Petter&gt; should try with another backend?</i><br>
<i>&gt; </i><br>
<i>&gt; Note that in 1.0.1 we rolled back the pnm backend to the previous</i><br>
<i>&gt; (stable) version.  That earlier version (before 1.0) should be _very_</i><br>
<i>&gt; stable (it passes "scanimage -T" etc.).</i><br>
<p>
Well, I think "fairly stable" or "somewhat less unstable" would be a better<br>
phrase...<br>
<p>
[njl98r@chef ~]$ scanimage -T -d pnm:0 --grayify --filename /usr/local/src/cvs-gnome/gimp/gimp_logo.ppm<br>
scanimage: scanning image of size 310x360 pixels at 8 bits/pixel<br>
scanimage: acquiring gray frame, 8 bits/sample<br>
scanimage: reading one scanline, 310 bytes...   PASS<br>
scanimage: reading one byte...          FAIL Overflow: 310 bytes<br>
scanimage: stepped read, 2 bytes...     FAIL Overflow: 310 bytes<br>
scanimage: stepped read, 4 bytes...     FAIL Overflow: 310 bytes<br>
<p>
This is with SANE 1.01 as released. There were always known bugs in the PNM<br>
backend, and someone did undertake to fix them, but it hasn't happened yet.<br>
At least 1.01 shipped with a PNM backend which works long enough to see that<br>
SANE is working properly, which 1.00 didn't manage :)<br>
<p>
Actually for my purposes the PNM backend isn't very useful anyway. I'm still<br>
working on a replacement test backend with behaviour which more closely<br>
resembles a real scanner. This should let people fiddle about with front-end<br>
code without needing a real scanner to hand, which the PNM backend is barely<br>
suitable for even when it works.<br>
<p>
Nick.<br>
<p>
<p>
<pre>
--
Source code, list archive, and docs: <a href="http://www.mostang.com/sane/">http://www.mostang.com/sane/</a>
To unsubscribe: echo unsubscribe sane-devel | mail <a href="mailto:majordomo@mostang.com">majordomo@mostang.com</a>
</pre>
<!-- body="end" -->
<p>
<ul>
<!-- next="start" -->
<li> <b>Next message:</b> <a href="0288.html">Tripp Lilley: "Re: PNM backend (was Segfaults in 1.01-pre ...)"</a>
<li> <b>Previous message:</b> <a href="0286.html">Oliver Rauch: "Re: 2 Channel SCSI Card"</a>
<li> <b>In reply to:</b> <a href="0281.html">David Mosberger-Tang: "Re: Sane 1.01pre5 segfaults in RedHat 5.1 (net)"</a>
<!-- nextthread="start" -->
<li> <b>Next in thread:</b> <a href="0292.html">Milon Firikis: "Re: Sane 1.01pre5 segfaults in RedHat 5.1 (net)"</a>
<!-- reply="end" -->
</ul>