On Sunday 08 June 2008 04:18, Nicolas wrote: > A bit of clarification: > > Canon released a packaged frontend+backend named scangearmp. This > program works fine as a whole, independently from SANE, with a few pixma > models only. > > Among this package, there are some files named libsane-canon_mfp.* , > which look like a closed source SANE backend. > But as Daniel pointed out, never heard about any successful experience > in using these files with SANE. And I'm wondering whether they really > conform to the SANE standard ...
True, I ran the whole Canon package. I noticed the files whose naming was suggestive of a connection with SANE, but found SANE clearly had nothing to do with the whole package. I notice the licence at (for example) http://support-au.canon.com.au/contents/AU/EN/0100084201.html includes the GPL, Version 2. Perhaps Wang would be good enough to clarify the matter? In relation to my previous post, if it's possible to accomodate manufacturers' sensitivities regarding proprietary code within the constraints of the GPL and overall SANE architecture (especially a major player such as Canon) the status of SANE as a de-facto standard would be greatly helped. David
