[sane-devel] USB device locking in the snapscan backend

[m. allan noah]

On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 4:08 PM, Julien BLACHE <jb at jblache.org> wrote:

>  Now, I really think it'd make more sense to have SANE entirely
>  decoupled from the frontend, so that the frontend would be relieved
>  from this kind of issues.
>
>  Also some backends use/block signals (among other things), something
>  which I've never been comfortable with.
>
>  Something like saned on steroids, which would be a real scan server,
>  could handle that and maybe backends could become single threaded
>  again.
>
>  Any thoughts on any of that ? :)

Yes, yes! Multi-threaded backends are hard to debug and hard to port,
and using a library that may, or may not, install signal handlers
depending on which backend is used gives front-end authors the blues.
i think your idea is good, as long as it is optional, since most
(all?) command line uses will have no need for it. actually, since
non-blocking is optional in backends, most gui front-ends may already
have a separate thread for it, making the discussion somewhat moot.

Oliver- I might be able to find some time this spring to work on the
driver, but i have no such scanner. i suppose they are not made
anymore? what model would be best to find on ebay? :)

allan

-- 
"The truth is an offense, but not a sin"