Hi, On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 01:35:50PM -0800, Lee Howard wrote: > So, next step was to get saned running so that the network workstations > could use the scanner also. That's when I ran into trouble. Now, > ultimately I'll be using saned from xinetd, but, for debugging purposes > I am running saned from the command-prompt. I'm not sure what > "correct" debugging information should look like, but when I run saned > from root, it *seems* to go fine. The server says this: > > [root@bilbo saned]# /usr/sbin/saned -d128 > [saned] main: starting debug mode (level 128) > [saned] main: trying to get port for service `sane' (getservbyname) > [saned] main: port is 6566 > [saned] main: socket () > [saned] main: setsockopt () > [saned] main: bind () > [saned] main: listen () > [saned] main: waiting for control connection > [saned] saned from sane-backends 1.0.10-pre3 ready > [saned] check_host: access by remote host: 127.0.0.1 > [saned] check_host: remote host is IN_LOOPBACK: access accepted > [saned] init: access by [email protected] accepted > [saned] process_request: waiting for request > [saned] process_request: got request 1 > [saned] process_request: waiting for request > [saned] process_request: got request 10 > [saned] quit: exiting > [root@bilbo saned]#
Looks fine. > When I run saned from user "saned", this is what I see instead. The > server says: [the same] > The client says this: > > [lee@bilbo lee]$ scanimage -L > device `plustek:/dev/usb/scanner0' is a Epson Perfection 1260/Photo USB > flatbed scanner > [lee@bilbo lee] > > So it appears that saned is not working the same when running as the > "saned" user. Check permissions, i.e. if saned has read/write permissions on /dev/usb/scanner0 . > Whatever the problem is, it can produce a segmentation fault as in > this example (using a mis-constructed device name). The server says: > bash-2.04$ /usr/sbin/saned -d128 [...] > [saned] check_host: access by remote host: 192.168.0.1 > [saned] check_host: remote host is not IN_LOOPBACK > [saned] check_host: local hostname: bilbo.x101.com > [saned] check_host: local hostname (from DNS): bilbo.x101.com > [saned] check_host: local host address (from DNS): 192.168.0.1 > [saned] check_host: remote host has same addr as local: access accepted > [saned] init: access by [email protected] accepted > [saned] process_request: waiting for request > [saned] process_request: got request 2 > Segmentation fault (core dumped) I don't get a segfault here when using a similar command. Please try running saned like this and send the output: SANE_DEBUG_DLL=255 /usr/sbin/saned -d128 Using device names without a backend name should result in opening the first backend, that's v4l in my configuration. > The client says: > > [lee@bilbo lee]$ scanimage --help -d "net:192.168.0.1" [...] > scanimage: open of device net:192.168.0.1 failed: Invalid argument Maybe one of the backends doesn't like empty device names. However, running with -d "plustek" doesn't result in segfaults here. > [root@bilbo saned]# gdb /usr/sbin/saned core Could you try to run saned in gdb directly? Maybe that gives more information. Bye, Henning
