Hi Yvan, Super. I'll change the status from 'good' to 'complete' and remove the 'ADF buggy' hint in the doc file later.
Many thanks for your help. Cheers, Rolf Am 02.01.2014 22:12, schrieb Yvan L. G?linas: > Hi, > > Thanks, Happy New Year. Here its -25C today... > > Depends on the frontend; > > -xsane: xsane seems to require to have the # of pgs upfront or use the > default '1' (top left corner of the gui). So if there are 3 pgs, > first one scan OK, but xsane don't check if there are other sheets. > Scanner will wait for some time (less than 1 min) and time out. > > -scanimage: with scanimage -b -d pixma:04A92773_0136514EEC94 --format > tiff --source "Automatic Document Feeder" --mode Gray All goes OK, > one file per page, scanimage listen/understand to the scanner status, > see below. > > Scanning -1 pages, incrementing by 1, numbering from 1 > Scanning page 1 > Scanned page 1. (scanner status = 5) > Scanning page 2 > Scanned page 2. (scanner status = 5) > Scanning page 3 > Scanned page 3. (scanner status = 5) > Scanning page 4 > scanimage: sane_read: Document feeder out of documents > Scanned page 4. (scanner status = 7) > > Let me know if need more > > Cheers > > > On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 3:17 PM, Rolf Bensch <rolf at bensch-online.de> wrote: >> Hi Yvan, >> >> Happy new year! >> >> One question about ADF: Do you need to tell the frontend the no. of >> scanning pages and/or does the scanner stop after the last scanned page >> with unknown no. of pages? >> >> Cheers, >> Rolf >> >> >> Am 30.12.2013 17:34, schrieb Yvan L. G?linas: >>> Hi Rolf, >>> >>> To recap my findings; >>> >>> -USB >>> >>> After fidling with xsane settings, I am now able to get good scan from >>> ADF, gray or color. Not sure why ADF and flatbed default settings >>> were so different. >>> >>> Basic ADF checks were: >>> - Full pages (3), gray and color mode. >>> - Area selected about 10cmx10cm) for the the three pages. >>> All ok >>> >>> I didn't try all combination of dpi (tried 300 and 75) etc, but ADF >>> work good up to now. >>> >>> >>> -NET >>> >>> After changing pixma_bjnp_private.h/BJNP_STRING to MFNP, was able to >>> get some scans. But quite inconsistent. xsane crashes each time. >>> xscanimage provided good scan in some cases and in other cases didn't >>> work (even in exact same condition as much I can see). When >>> xscanimage didn't work was getting following >>> >>> bjnp] bjnp_recv_header:ERROR, Received response has cmd code 80, expected 33 >>> [bjnp] Could not read response to command! >>> [bjnp] bjnp_recv_header:ERROR, Received response has cmd code 10, expected >>> 33 >>> [bjnp] Could not read response to command! >>> [bjnp] bjnp_recv_header:ERROR, Received response has cmd code 4, expected 33 >>> [bjnp] Could not read response to command! >>> [bjnp] bjnp_recv_header:ERROR, Received response has cmd code 1, expected 33 >>> [bjnp] Could not read response to command! >>> [bjnp] bjnp_recv_header:ERROR, Received response has cmd code 0, expected 33 >>> >>> >>> Any suggestions were I should look/change? >>> >>> Thanks! >>> >>> On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 3:53 PM, Rolf Bensch <rolf at bensch-online.de> >>> wrote: >>>> Hi Yvan, >>>> >>>> please ask Sane mailing list about network support. >>>> >>>> If you have the capabilities to do some bug fixing, I can send you my >>>> ideas about fixing the ADF issue. I don't own an imageCLASS device with >>>> ADF, so I cannot fix it by myself. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Rolf >>>> >>>> Am 27.12.2013 21:42, schrieb Yvan L. G?linas: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> Yes, thanks, now xsane sees the ADF. First page is scanned OK, except >>>>> that sheet is not fully getting out and following ones not processed. >>>>> So I assumed this is buggy. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Re network: looking at a wireshark capture in windows, bjnp is not >>>>> used, I see instead MFNP to port 8610. 'Query' beside this looks >>>>> alike. >>>>> Windows (toolbox): Data: 4d464e50020100000000000000000000 >>>>> sane-backend: Data: 424a4e50020100000000000000000000 >>>>> >>>>> Using the bjnp setting (pixma.conf ) with port 8612 getting from >>>>> the printer 'Port Unreachable) (in Wireshark). Using port 8610 >>>>> instead, printer just drop the packet (ie no reply). >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 2:57 PM, Rolf Bensch <rolf at bensch-online.de> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> Hi Yvan, >>>>>> >>>>>> Sorry, I forgot to enable ADF for this scanner. I just committed the fix >>>>>> to git. >>>>>> >>>>>> If you want to enable Ethernet support, please read sane-pixma man page >>>>>> for details. >>>>>> >>>>>> Please notice that Sane sees this scanner as Pixma device, *not* as >>>>>> Canon device. >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> Rolf >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Am 27.12.2013 20:17, schrieb Yvan L. G?linas: >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> xsane don't see ADF, only the flatbed. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> scanimage -A same thing >>>>>>> All options specific to device `pixma:04A92773_0136514EEC94': >>>>>>> Scan mode: >>>>>>> --resolution auto||75|150|300|600dpi [75] >>>>>>> Sets the resolution of the scanned image. >>>>>>> --mode auto|Color|Gray [Color] >>>>>>> Selects the scan mode (e.g., lineart, monochrome, or color). >>>>>>> --source Flatbed [Flatbed] >>>>>>> Selects the scan source (such as a document-feeder). Set source >>>>>>> before >>>>>>> mode and resolution. Resets mode and resolution to auto values. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> (This is via USB. I may have messed up while doing the update to >>>>>>> sane-backend 1.0.25git , the 'net' is no more workring for another >>>>>>> scanner (hp) (didn't work for the canon anyway, maybe as it uses mnfp >>>>>>> and not bjfp).) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 5:36 AM, Rolf Bensch <rolf at bensch-online.de> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> Hi Yvan, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Many thanks reporting your scanner. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Your scanner is a member of the MF4800 Series scanners. And Canon is >>>>>>>> using both imageCLASS and i-SENSYS for these scanners. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I assume that ADF is buggy for your scanner, too. Please test it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I just committed to git 14" legal support for the MF4800 and an update >>>>>>>> for the doc files. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>> Rolf >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Am 26.12.2013 21:35, schrieb Yvan L. G?linas: >>>>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I have a Canon imageCLASS MF4880DW and noted that it is not in the >>>>>>>>> sane-backend list. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Checking the usb ID, it is the same as i-SENSYS MF4890dw. Using >>>>>>>>> backend version 1.0.25 and xsane looks to be working fine (few scans, >>>>>>>>> default settings). >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ---------------- >>>>>>>>> scanimage -L: >>>>>>>>> device `pixma:04A92773_0136514EEC94' is a CANON Canon i-SENSYS MF4800 >>>>>>>>> Series multi-function peripheral >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> lsusb: Bus 003 Device 004: ID 04a9:2773 Canon, Inc. >>>>>>>>> ---------------- >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The status of the MF4890dw is shown as "Untested", Any specific tests >>>>>>>>> still required (with the MF4880DW)? Just let me know. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks for the great work! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>> >
