[sane-devel] Canoscan 2700f

[abel deuring]

Jonathan Knight wrote:
> 
> Arrgghhhhh.......
> 
> I cannot believe it was something so stupid that caused by 2700F not to
> work.
> 
> Okay.  Here's what I did.
> 
> I took Abel's advice.  I put the sg module back to the default.  I reset the
> default buffer size to the standard 32K and ran up sane 1.0.13.
> 
> I duly collected the output and noted the error at the end
> 
> [sanei_scsi] sanei_scsi_req_wait: read 64 bytes
> [sanei_scsi] sanei_scsi_req_wait: SCSI command complained: Success
> [sanei_scsi] sense buffer: f0 00 44 00 00 00 00 06 00 00 00 00 60 00 00 00
> [sanei_scsi] target status: 02 host status: 0000 driver status: 0008
> [canon] >> sense_handler
> [canon] canon_sense_handler(3, 0x8055718, (nil))
> [canon] sense buffer: f0 00 44 00 00 00 00 06 00 00 00 00 60 00 00 00
> [canon] sense message: problem not analyzed (unknown SCSI class)
> 
> A quick rumage on the net reveals that 44 is hardware error and 60 00 is
> lamp failure.  I'd decoded this two days ago and ignored it because quite
> clearly the lamp was fine.


Jonathan,

firstly: great to hear that most of your problems are fixed now.

The lack of really meanful error messages in Sane bother me since quite 
some time. Many SCSI scanners can return sense data similar the to that 
you mentioned (other errors I've seen or read about are "fuse blown" 
[ok, obviously not for every fuse ;)], location of paper jam, 
calibration error), but to only way Sane can reported them at present is 
via debug messages. Hopefully we can fix that with Sane version 2. That 
should save users a few gray hairs.

> I quickly followed up with "scanimage -d 'canon:/dev/sg3'" which bombed.  Hmmmm.
> Tried xsane which gave a segmentaion failure.  Not to worry - I've got five
> versions of sane ready to test, lets see what the latest version is that
> works.
> 
> I can now report that sane-1.0.11 now works perfectly with my 2700F with no
> messing with the SG module and a default buffer size of 32768.  However
> 1.0.12 and 1.0.13 do not work so something funny happened there.  Is anyone
> fixing the problem or shall I try to make ammends for my foolishness by
> trying to track down the bug?

I think we don't don't need amends or apologies or whatever ;) But if 
you feel comfortable debugging Sane, go ahead ;) Anyway, I don't know 
that much about the Canon backend, but some other part of Sane may also 
have caused the crash. So, could you run scanimage or xsane under gdb, 
so that we can get clue, where the error occurs? (as usual, setting 
SANE_DEBUG_SANEI_SCSI and SANE_DEBUG_CANON is also useful.)

cheers
Abel