Wed, 29 Jun 2005 08:32:58 +0200
On Wednesday 29 June 2005 01:14, Paul Smedley wrote:
> Hi Gerald,
> On 28/6/2005, "Gerald Murray" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> >Quoting Paul Smedley <email@example.com>:
> >> One query I have though is about devname
> >> I see in sanei_usb.h that the libusb format for this is libusb:busno:devno
> >> Is this defined for all devices or just ones that sanei_usb_init thinks
> >> are scanners?
> >It is defined for each usb device. Having this naming scheme allows the
> >OS to use the same functionality that applies to filenames for usb devices.
> >So the permissions on that filename can be used to indicate the permissions
> >for its associated usb device.
> Well permissions are pretty much non-existent on os/2...
> >> I assume that the format of devname really isn't important - so long as
> >> it's useful to the usb method being used (ie kernel, libusb or usbcalls
> >> for OS/2) in determining which usb device is being attached to?
> >> In which case, I could use usbcalls:deviceno or even just deviceno?
> >For portability, it would be best to use just one system for all usb devices
> >within that operating system. This is a problem for the OS you are using..
> I don't see why it's a problem?
> usbcalls uses a device number for each usb device that's attached to the
> Using the format above, I could have for eg.
> usbcalls:0 - ie my USB Floppy
> usbcalls:1 - ie my USB Printer
> usbcalls:2 - ie my USB Scanner
> When usbcalls:2 is passed to sanei_usb_open, I know to open device number
> 2 via usbcalls? Or am I missing something?
just for curiosity - I remember Franz Bakans' efforts to make SANE work
on OS/2 - are you working on a similar project or is it the same one?