sane-project-website/old-archive/1999-07/0106.html

108 wiersze
5.4 KiB
HTML

<!-- received="Sun Jul 18 13:26:40 1999 PDT" -->
<!-- sent="Sun, 18 Jul 99 16:32:36 -0500" -->
<!-- name="Irv Thomae" -->
<!-- email="irv.thomae@succinct.com" -->
<!-- subject="Re: Microtek E3 won't scan, but II-G okay (SANE-OS/2)" -->
<!-- id="199907182034.QAA16997@benz.tpk.net" -->
<!-- inreplyto="Microtek E3 won't scan, but II-G okay (SANE-OS/2)" -->
<title>sane-devel: Re: Microtek E3 won't scan, but II-G okay (SANE-OS/2)</title>
<h1>Re: Microtek E3 won't scan, but II-G okay (SANE-OS/2)</h1>
<b>Irv Thomae</b> (<a href="mailto:irv.thomae@succinct.com"><i>irv.thomae@succinct.com</i></a>)<br>
<i>Sun, 18 Jul 99 16:32:36 -0500</i>
<p>
<ul>
<li> <b>Messages sorted by:</b> <a href="date.html#106">[ date ]</a><a href="index.html#106">[ thread ]</a><a href="subject.html#106">[ subject ]</a><a href="author.html#106">[ author ]</a>
<!-- next="start" -->
<li> <b>Next message:</b> <a href="0107.html">Nick Lamb: "Re: Release early, release often"</a>
<li> <b>Previous message:</b> <a href="0105.html">georgewu@mediaone.net: "Microtek X6EL problem"</a>
<li> <b>Maybe in reply to:</b> <a href="0003.html">Irv Thomae: "Microtek E3 won't scan, but II-G okay (SANE-OS/2)"</a>
<!-- nextthread="start" -->
<li> <b>Next in thread:</b> <a href="0117.html">Yuri Dario: "Re: Microtek E3 won't scan, but II-G okay (SANE-OS/2)"</a>
<li> <b>Reply:</b> <a href="0117.html">Yuri Dario: "Re: Microtek E3 won't scan, but II-G okay (SANE-OS/2)"</a>
<!-- reply="end" -->
</ul>
<!-- body="start" -->
On Fri, 02 Jul 99 10:09:31 -0500, Irv Thomae wrote:<br>
<p>
<i>&gt; Yuri Dario, author of the SANE-OS2 port, has asked me to post this </i><br>
<i>&gt;problem-report here. We're aware that "microtek" backend problems with the </i><br>
<i>&gt;E3 were fixed in the Linux distribution almost a year ago, but for reasons </i><br>
<i>&gt;unclear, the OS/2 ports of SANE version 1.01 (as well as 0.72 and 0.74) </i><br>
<i>&gt;continue unable to drive the E3:</i><br>
<i>&gt; (1) After a short precal dance, the E3 quits instead of scanning</i><br>
<i>&gt; and yet, </i><br>
<i>&gt; (2)[YD]&gt; Looking at code, there aren't OS/2 specific patches to the</i><br>
<i>&gt; [microtek] backend.</i><br>
<i>&gt;...................</i><br>
<i>&gt; The E3 makes a series of short, slow-speed moves, then a brief, </i><br>
<i>&gt;high-pitch whine (fast return to home postion, following precal?) </i><br>
<i>&gt;Immediately after that short move, SCANIMAGE fails with a "Device I/O </i><br>
<i>&gt;error".</i><br>
<p>
<i>&gt; ....</i><br>
<p>
With sane_debug_sanei_scsi=32 and sane_debug_microtek=32, the E3 failure <br>
occurs after precalibration:<br>
<p>
<i>&gt;[microtek] do_precalibrate done.</i><br>
<i>&gt;[microtek] .scanning_frame...</i><br>
<i>&gt;[microtek] .scanning_frame: in- 0,0 1181,1181</i><br>
<i>&gt;[microtek] .scanning_frame: out- 0,0 1181,1181</i><br>
<i>&gt;[microtek] .accessory...</i><br>
<i>&gt;[microtek] .download_gamma...</i><br>
<i>&gt;[microtek] .mode_select 0...</i><br>
<i>&gt;[microtek] .mode_select: pap_len: 3505</i><br>
<i>&gt;[microtek] .mode_select_1 0...</i><br>
<i>&gt;[microtek] .save_mode_sense 0...</i><br>
<i>&gt;[microtek] .wait_ready 0...</i><br>
<i>&gt;[microtek] .start_scan...</i><br>
<i>&gt;[sanei_scsi] sanei_scsi_cmd: command 0x1b failed.</i><br>
<i>&gt;[microtek] end_scan...</i><br>
<i>&gt;[microtek] .stop_scan...</i><br>
<i>&gt;[sanei_scsi] sanei_scsi_cmd: command 0x1b failed.</i><br>
<i>&gt;[microtek] end_scan: OY! on stop_scan</i><br>
<i>&gt;[sanei_scsi] OS/2: ASPI closed</i><br>
<i>&gt;scanimage: sane_start: Error during device I/O</i><br>
<i>&gt;[microtek] sane_cancel...</i><br>
<i>&gt;[microtek] end_scan...</i><br>
<i>&gt;[microtek] sane_close...</i><br>
<i>&gt;[microtek] sane_exit...</i><br>
<i>&gt;[microtek] sane_exit: MICROTEK says goodbye.</i><br>
<p>
Besides SANE, I also have Jan Schonepauck's "mtekscan" (Microtek only, last <br>
updated 1997 AFAIK) While browsing through that documentation, I recently <br>
noticed a comment to the effect that the start- or stop-scan command had <br>
needed some "timeout-tweaking" before (mistakenly) declaring it failed.<br>
<p>
From earlier exploration of this list's archives, I'm also aware that in <br>
porting SANE to OS/2, Yuri had to contend with subtle differences between the <br>
UNix/Linux thread model and that of OS/2.<br>
<p>
I'm probably grasping at straws here, but is it conceivable that seemingly <br>
identical backend code might show different _timing_ characteristics when <br>
executed under OS/2 (multi-threaded, but lacking fork() ), as opposed to <br>
running on the same x86 box under Linux? <br>
<p>
<br>
<p>
<p>
<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="0107.html">Nick Lamb: "Re: Release early, release often"</a>
<li> <b>Previous message:</b> <a href="0105.html">georgewu@mediaone.net: "Microtek X6EL problem"</a>
<li> <b>Maybe in reply to:</b> <a href="0003.html">Irv Thomae: "Microtek E3 won't scan, but II-G okay (SANE-OS/2)"</a>
<!-- nextthread="start" -->
<li> <b>Next in thread:</b> <a href="0117.html">Yuri Dario: "Re: Microtek E3 won't scan, but II-G okay (SANE-OS/2)"</a>
<li> <b>Reply:</b> <a href="0117.html">Yuri Dario: "Re: Microtek E3 won't scan, but II-G okay (SANE-OS/2)"</a>
<!-- reply="end" -->
</ul>