Hi Gerhard, Le mer 26/11/2003 à 11:48, Gerhard Jaeger a écrit :
> > So maybe a solution for the OpticPro 1212U would be to i) adapt the > > scanner-specific sequences using traces from Twain scans under windows, > > and ii) integrate the adapted GL640 file with the existing 98003-based > > backend. > > So was my idea ;-) Good. :) > BUT - now it comes: > I simply turned the IO operations in the parport backend, and hoped, that > the scanner will work. The major problem is, that the GL640 allows various > ways on how a parport-ASIC can be connected, and therefore it is almost > impossible to directly "map" the former parport I/O functions to USB I/O > functions... Uhm. OK. :( How about reverse engineering the connections between the 98003 and the GL640? My brother is not a software guy indeed, but he can use an ohmmeter and help sort out things there. > After all of these trials had no or minor success, I made some USB-snoop > loggings and noticed, that for this scanner almost only bulk-read and -writes > are used and so the whole parport-driver code needs to be rewritten there. > There are currently also some parts of the log, that I do not understand... An outside eye might be helpful. Could you send me the logs together with an indication of what the scanner was asked to do at that time? > > Another choice I see is taking the GL640 code and turning it into a > > pseudo ieee1284 kernel module or an extension to the ieee1284 lib. Then > > we could use the genuine 98003-based backend. But this seems not to be > > design choice for the fb630, so it might be a more bug-attracting > > choice. > > See my statements above. It might be a good idea to have a generic > parport-USB bridge library, where we can simply add more of these > bridges and where we have some functions like write_control, write_data, > but I doubt that this will help much in simply porting existing parport-code > to some USB-parport code, as we almost never know how the ASIC is > connected to the bridge... Well, it's not a promising option anyway; these are legacy devices, I'm afraid. So let's forget that idea. > Not very good news, I know ;-) I'be seen worse. :) -- Albert ARIBAUD <[email protected]>
