[sane-devel] New version of the Plustek backend

[Jaeger, Gerhard]

Hi Henning,

thanks for the tests, some of them cover my observations 
but I currently can't say why this happens...
Even it's a problem while processing the configuration file,
it's not good to have these segfaults.
I'll check this out later this week. 

If you need assistance while tweaking the Bearpaw settings
simply send me a mail to my private account (I think you
already have the address)

Gerhard

On Montag, 11. März 2002 22:43, Henning Meier-Geinitz wrote:
[SNIP]
> I plugged in my two BearPaws, didn't change the default plustek.conf
> and tried scanimage -L as root:
>
> [...]
> [plustek] Scanner information:
> [plustek] Model  : BearPaw 1200
> [plustek] Asic   : 0x42
> [plustek] Flags  : 0x00000206
> [plustek] Version: 0x00000000
> [plustek] drvclose()
> [plustek] usbDev_stopScan(mode=0)
> [plustek] usbDev_ScanEnd(), start=0, park=0
> [plustek] usbDev_close()
> [plustek] attach: model = >BearPaw 1200<
> [plustek] sane_get_devices (0xbffff868, 0)
> device plustek:/dev/usbscanner' is a Mustek BearPaw 1200 USB flatbed
> scanner [plustek] sane_exit
> [plustek] Shutdown called (dev->fd=-1, /dev/usbscanner)
> [plustek] Waiting for scanner-ready...
> [plustek] Lamp-Timer stopped
> Segmentation fault
>
> If I use [usb] 0x0400 0x1000 instead of only [usb] no segfault occurs.
> Also no segfault if I run as normal user. I have no idea why.
>
> If I change the config file to use the two scanners, I also get a
> segfault (this time as normal user and using xsane):
>
> [plustek] sane_init, ><
> [plustek] sane_init, >#<
> [plustek] sane_init, ># and of course the device-name<
> [plustek] sane_init, >#<
> [plustek] sane_init, >device /dev/usb/scanner0<
> [plustek] Decoding device name >/dev/usb/scanner0<
> [plustek] sane_init, ><
> [plustek] sane_init, >#<
> [plustek] sane_init, ># to define a new device, start with a new
> section:<
> [plustek] sane_init, ># [usb] or [parport]<
> [plustek] sane_init, >#<
> Speicherzugriffsfehler
>
> I just copied the original entries for [usb] and only changed the
> first device to /dev/usb/scanner1. If I only add vendor/device ids to
> the first [usb] entry, no segfault occurs.
>
> Scanning works ok with both scanner as with the earlier plustek
> backends, but I haven't done many tests.
[SNAP]