Hey Brian,

Thanks for looking into this and providing me the impetus to check
the situation out again.

I've installed 3.17.6+repack0-2 from testing on this jessie machine,
alongside sane 1.0.14-12, and while a local scanimage -L listing

  device `hpaio:/net/HP_LaserJet_3052?ip=' is
  a Hewlett-Packard HP_LaserJet_3052 all-in-one

doing so remotely just gets "No scanners were identified." Yet, he
logs on the sane server indicate that the connection attempt was
authorized, and one local scanner found:

  systemd[1]: Started Scanner Service ([2001:xxx]:58988).
  saned[29780]: saned (AF-indep+IPv6+systemd) from sane-backends 1.0.25 
starting up
  saned[29780]: check_host: access by remote host: 2001:xxx
  saned[29780]: init: access granted to madduck@2001:xxx
  saned[29780]: saned exiting
  saned[29780]: [sanei_debug] Setting debug level of dll to 255.
  saned[29780]: [dll] sane_init: SANE dll backend version 1.0.13 from 
sane-backends 1.0.25
  saned[29780]: [dll] sane_init/read_dlld: attempting to open directory 
  saned[29780]: [dll] sane_init/read_dlld: using config directory 
  saned[29780]: [dll] sane_init/read_dlld: considering /etc/sane.d/dll.d/hplip
  saned[29780]: [dll] sane_init/read_config: reading dll.d/hplip
  saned[29780]: [dll] add_backend: adding backend `hpaio'
  saned[29780]: [dll] sane_init/read_dlld: done.
  saned[29780]: [dll] sane_init/read_config: reading dll.conf
  saned[29780]: [dll] sane_get_devices
  saned[29780]: [dll] load: searching backend `hpaio' in 
  saned[29780]: [dll] load: trying to load 
  saned[29780]: [dll] load: dlopen()ing 
  saned[29780]: [dll] init: initializing backend `hpaio'
  saned[29780]: [sanei_debug] Setting debug level of hpaio to 255.
  saned[29780]: [hpaio] sane_hpaio_init(): scan/sane/hpaio.c 323
  saned[29780]: [dll] init: backend `hpaio' is version 1.0.0
  saned[29780]: [hpaio] sane_hpaio_get_devices(local=1): scan/sane/hpaio.c 342
  saned[29780]: [dll] sane_get_devices: found 0 devices
  saned[29780]: saned exiting

Judging from the local=1 followed by "found 0 devices", I'd say the
problem continues to exist precisely as I described in #838212.
I might of course be very wrong…

 .''`.   martin f. krafft <madduck@d.o> @martinkrafft
: :'  :  proud Debian developer
`. `'`   http://people.debian.org/~madduck
  `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems
"wer ein warum hat, dem ist kein wie zu schwer."
                                                 - friedrich nietzsche

Attachment: digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital GPG signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/sig-policy/999bbcc4/current)

Reply via email to