[sane-devel] usb Scanner always busy

[Gene Heskett]

On Friday 07 November 2003 15:22, Henning Meier-Geinitz wrote:
>Hi,
>
>On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 08:07:52PM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
>> Oops, sorry Henning.  The scanner is an Epson Perfection 1250u.
>> sane-backends is 1.0.11 IIRC.  Present kernel is 2.6.0-test9-mm2.
>
>1.0.12 is the current stable version. There are also snapshots of
>1.0.13. However I don't remember such a problem.
>
>> xsane, when launched, appears to be ok.  But click on get preview,
>> or just click on the go button, and the return is that its busy,
>> coming back instantly.
>>
>> dmesg seems to indicate its found and linked in the normal manner.
>
>Please show us the output of "scanimage -L".

[root@coyote linux-2.6]# scanimage -L
device `v4l:/dev/video0' is a Noname BT878 video (Hauppauge (bt878)) virtual device
device `v4l:/dev/bttv0' is a Noname BT878 video (Hauppauge (bt878)) virtual device
device `test:0' is a Noname frontend-tester virtual device
device `test:1' is a Noname frontend-tester virtual device
device `plustek:/dev/usb/scanner0' is a Epson Perfection 1250/Photo USB flatbed scanner

>> But click on get preview gets a message box telling me it failed
>> to start the scanner, and does it in just a few hundred
>> milliseconds.
>
>To be sure that no other backend makes trouble, you can disable
>everything but your backend in dll.conf.
>
>> >You can enebale debug messages by setting the environment
>> > variable SANE_DEBUG_BACKENDNAME=255 (BACKENDNAME is the name of
>> > the backend you use).

Believe it or not, that (export SANE_DEBUG_PLUSTEK) doesn't do a thing!
Absolutely nothing sane related shows up in the log.

>> I'm not sure which backend is showing,
>
>"scanimage -L" shows the backend name.
>
>> but let me run it...  Plustek
>> seems to be the choice after it wades past a bunch of bttv stuffs
>> and the test backends.
>
>"plustek" or "epkowa" if you have isntalled the latter.
>
>> Setting the env var doesn't seem to effect things either...
>
>Setting it prints debug messages.
>
>E.g.
>
>SANE_DEBUG_PLUSTEK=255 scanimage -d plustek >image.pnm

That, clipped to a cli, would appear to be working, the scanner is
actually in motion.  But it finished  very very quickly once the
lamp warmup timeout had elapsed.  Looks like 33 seconds overall
elapsed time, and the image.pnm file is a hair over 111k.

Humm, I wonder if up2date ignored me again, and installed new rpms.
If thats the case, thats the end of that program on my system, its
happened at least twice before.  Mmm, no, no sane here according to
 rpm -qa|grep sane

Ok, scanimage seems to sort of work, why not xsane?

-- 
Cheers, Gene
AMD K6-III@500mhz 320M
Athlon1600XP@1400mhz  512M
99.27% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Yahoo.com attornies please note, additions to this message
by Gene Heskett are:
Copyright 2003 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.