Hello I have a canon MP160 multi-maschiene. I have " mp150-0.12.2 ", the MP 150 and MP170 is there supported. make install brings:
No supported scanner found! Sorry, I couldn't detect your scanner. Please check if it is connected and turned on. The following models are currently supported. sane-find-scanner -v brings: found USB scanner (vendor=0x04a9 [Canon], product=0x1714 [MP160]) at libusb:005:010 # Your USB scanner was (probably) detected. It may or may not be supported by # SANE. Try scanimage -L and read the backend's manpage. Does anybody nows, how I can need the MP150 driver for the MP160 scanner? thanks toldap -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/sane-devel/attachments/20061227/43cacfbb/attachment.html From [email protected] Thu Dec 28 00:19:22 2006 From: [email protected] (abel deuring) Date: Thu Dec 28 00:26:33 2006 Subject: [sane-devel] Microtek 4800 scanner In-Reply-To: <[email protected]> References: <1166991780.8218.2.camel@localhost> <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Dan wrote: > I have seen some talk on sane2. It seems to me and keep in mind that > I just converted to Linux this year, that we should be pushing for a > scanner standard so we do not have to keep writing drivers forever. > Most cameras seem to adhere to one of 2 standards. My GCC printer at > first didn't seem to be supported but it followed 2 standards > (postscript and pcl). All I needed to do was move the .PPD file over > from windows to get the printer working. It seems that we should have > a standard for scanners and a PPD equivalent that specifies the > differences for each scanner. congratulations that you bought a "Linux compatible" printer :) There exist many cheaper "GDI printers" which leave much of the render work to the Windows GDI. These machines often have a proprietary interface that is not publicly documented. The situation with scanners is similar: Two different USB chipsets for scanners may work so differently that it does not make sense to support them by a single driver/backend. Have a look into the source code for example of the Plustek backend and of the gt68xx backend to get a better idea :) And even for SCSI scanners, who are supposed to support the same command set defined in the SCSI standard, there are so many different extensions of the command parameters for different scanners that it does not make sense at least for a project like Sane to write a Grand Unified SCSI Scanner Driver: Most of the Sane developers have access to only a few scanners, and writing software that you can't properly test due to "missing" hardware is quite a challenge. Abel
