On January 21 2005 00:46, Gerhard Jaeger wrote:
> [ . . . ] in general I suggest first to snoop the USB
> traffic on the windoze box, analyse it and figure out the basic chip
> settings for this scanner, then you should be save. It's some odd kinda
> work, but I'm pretty sure there's no way without
On Friday 21 January 2005 08:08, Luke Campagnola wrote:
> On January 18 2005 00:29, you wrote:
> > On Tuesday 18 January 2005 03:23, Luke Campagnola wrote:
> > > I got a Canon LiDE 35 a while back without checking to see if it was
> > > supported (I cleverly assumed that LiDE 30 support was good en
On January 18 2005 00:29, you wrote:
> On Tuesday 18 January 2005 03:23, Luke Campagnola wrote:
> > I got a Canon LiDE 35 a while back without checking to see if it was
> > supported (I cleverly assumed that LiDE 30 support was good enough), and
> > rather than sending it back, I'm giving a go at w
On Tuesday 18 January 2005 03:23, Luke Campagnola wrote:
> I got a Canon LiDE 35 a while back without checking to see if it was
> supported
> (I cleverly assumed that LiDE 30 support was good enough), and rather than
> sending it back, I'm giving a go at writing the backend. I'm most of the way
I got a Canon LiDE 35 a while back without checking to see if it was supported
(I cleverly assumed that LiDE 30 support was good enough), and rather than
sending it back, I'm giving a go at writing the backend. I'm most of the way
finished sorting out the differences between the gl646 and the gl
