Re: More Canon scanners (usbdevs, uscanner.c)

2010-11-26 Thread Miod Vallat
On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 4:28 PM, Mattieu Baptiste mattie...@gmail.com wrote: Ok, here is a proposed diff that can also be found at: http://www.brimbelle.org/mattieu/stuff/uscanner.diff Compile tested on amd64. As noted by jasper, I forgot MAKEDEV, so here is another try... I have

Re: More Canon scanners (usbdevs, uscanner.c)

2010-11-25 Thread Mattieu Baptiste
On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 2:28 PM, Mark Kettenis mark.kette...@xs4all.nl wrote: Just nuke it. It'll be sitting in the attick if anybody wants it back. Ok, here is a proposed diff that can also be found at: http://www.brimbelle.org/mattieu/stuff/uscanner.diff Compile tested on amd64. Index:

Re: More Canon scanners (usbdevs, uscanner.c)

2010-11-24 Thread Miod Vallat
But is there any reason to keep these devices in uscanner? To my knowledge, sane is the only tool to access such devices. Is there other software that need uscanner? And more generally, is there any reason to keep uscanner? According to the manpage, it was written to provide a

Re: More Canon scanners (usbdevs, uscanner.c)

2010-11-24 Thread Antoine Jacoutot
On Wed, 24 Nov 2010, Miod Vallat wrote: But is there any reason to keep these devices in uscanner? To my knowledge, sane is the only tool to access such devices. Is there other software that need uscanner? And more generally, is there any reason to keep uscanner? According to the

Re: More Canon scanners (usbdevs, uscanner.c)

2010-11-24 Thread Stuart Henderson
On 2010/11/24 19:06, Antoine Jacoutot wrote: On Wed, 24 Nov 2010, Miod Vallat wrote: But is there any reason to keep these devices in uscanner? To my knowledge, sane is the only tool to access such devices. Is there other software that need uscanner? And more generally, is there

Re: More Canon scanners (usbdevs, uscanner.c)

2010-11-24 Thread David Coppa
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 8:30 PM, Stuart Henderson s...@spacehopper.org wrote: How about removing uscanner from GENERIC for now, then if nobody has a problem with it, remove the code at a later date? (I would suggest picking that date in advance so it doesn't sit around for ages). seconded.

Re: More Canon scanners (usbdevs, uscanner.c)

2010-11-24 Thread Antoine Jacoutot
On Wed, 24 Nov 2010, Stuart Henderson wrote: How about removing uscanner from GENERIC for now, then if nobody has a problem with it, remove the code at a later date? (I would suggest picking that date in advance so it doesn't sit around for ages). I'm all for it. However, people using sane

Re: More Canon scanners (usbdevs, uscanner.c)

2010-11-24 Thread Kenneth R Westerback
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 07:30:22PM +, Stuart Henderson wrote: On 2010/11/24 19:06, Antoine Jacoutot wrote: On Wed, 24 Nov 2010, Miod Vallat wrote: But is there any reason to keep these devices in uscanner? To my knowledge, sane is the only tool to access such devices. Is there

Re: More Canon scanners (usbdevs, uscanner.c)

2010-11-23 Thread Mattieu Baptiste
On Sat, Jul 1, 2006 at 12:38 PM, Miod Vallat m...@online.fr wrote: This diff add support for more Canon scanners in -current (from NetBSD). Tested on i386 with a CanoScan Lide 30: Applied. Thanks! Miod Hi all, Don't know what I drank at this time but it wasn't good at all for my brain.

Re: More Canon scanners (usbdevs, uscanner.c)

2010-11-23 Thread Miod Vallat
I'd like to know if people are able to use their Canon scanner with xsane via uscanner, because I can't with my Canon Lide 30. So... if people have the same problems that I'm facing with Canon scanners, I propose to completely revert the uscanner.c commit (rev 1.21). Could this be caused

Re: More Canon scanners (usbdevs, uscanner.c)

2010-11-23 Thread Mattieu Baptiste
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 10:51 PM, Miod Vallat m...@online.fr wrote: Could this be caused by changes in the kernel and/or in xsane? Did you try e.g. an older xsane against a kernel which attaches your hardware as uscanner, and against a kernel with the uscanner.c chunk reverted? In fact, if my

Re: More Canon scanners (usbdevs, uscanner.c)

2010-11-23 Thread Antoine Jacoutot
On Tue, 23 Nov 2010, Mattieu Baptiste wrote: On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 10:51 PM, Miod Vallat m...@online.fr wrote: Could this be caused by changes in the kernel and/or in xsane? Did you try e.g. an older xsane against a kernel which attaches your hardware as uscanner, and against a kernel