Hi, On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 05:04:39PM -0800, Lee Howard wrote: > >Looks like it happens in sane_open. Please Try setting "export > >SANE_DEBUG_PLUSTEK=255" also > > Here you go... > > [saned] main: starting debug mode (level 128) [...] > [saned] process_request: got request 2 > [dll] load: searching backend `plustek' in `/usr/lib/sane' > [dll] load: trying to load `/usr/lib/sane/libsane-plustek.so.1' > [dll] load: dlopen()ing `/usr/lib/sane/libsane-plustek.so.1' > [dll] init: initializing backend `plustek' > [sanei_debug] Setting debug level of plustek to 255. > [plustek] Plustek backend V0.45-3, part of sane-backends 1.0.10-pre3 [...] > [plustek] open failed: -1 > [dll] init: backend `plustek' is version 1.0.0 > [plustek] sane_get_devices (0xbffff7a8, 1) > [dll] load: searching backend `net' in `/usr/lib/sane' > [dll] load: trying to load `/usr/lib/sane/libsane-net.so.1' > [dll] load: dlopen()ing `/usr/lib/sane/libsane-net.so.1' > [dll] init: initializing backend `net' > [dll] init: backend `net' is version 1.0.10 > Segmentation fault (core dumped)
I was wrong. The bug not in plustek or any other backend. It's a bug in saned. Thanks for mentioning, this is a rather grave bug. It's fixed in CVS. I'll write a separate announcement on this list about the details. > Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. > 0x0804ada3 in strcpy () at strcpy:-1 > -1 strcpy: No such file or directory. > in strcpy > (gdb) bt > #0 0x0804ada3 in strcpy () at strcpy:-1 > #1 0x08050a80 in _IO_stdin_used () > #2 0x0804b7d2 in strcpy () at strcpy:-1 > #3 0x4009f657 in __libc_start_main (main=0x804b420 <strcpy+7224>, > argc=2, ubp_av=0xbffff994, init=0x80492e0 <_init>, fini=0x804e8f0 > <_fini>, rtld_fini=0x4000dcd4 <_dl_fini>, stack_end=0xbffff98c) at > ../sysdeps/generic/libc-start.c:129 For some reason the gdb output is rather misleading here. > Remember that > 1) the permissions on the server prohibit saned from access, and It happens alway when no scanner is found. Try to unplug your scanner, you'll get the same result. > 2) the client executes 'scanimage --help -d "net:192.168.0.1" Results in empty resource name -> bang. Bye, Henning
