[sane-devel] Description file, Epson, and wildcards

[Olaf Meeuwissen]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Chris Bagwell wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 11:36 PM, Olaf Meeuwissen
> <olaf.meeuwissen at avasys.jp> wrote:
>> Chris Bagwell wrote:
>>> On Fedora, it seems its a common problem that hal or udev gets the
>>> permissions for scsi Epson scanners wrong and users can only scan as
>>> root.  They generically fix permissions for scsi "scanner" class but
>>> not "processor".  Their work around is to edit entry for specific
>>> scanner in the epson2.desc file and a line as follows each time a user
>>> reports a problem:
>>>
>>> :scsi "ESPON" "Exact Model Name Reported" "processor"
>> The 2010-03-01 git snapshot has
>>
>>  $  grep :scsi doc/descriptions*/ep*.desc
>>  doc/descriptions/epson.desc::scsi "EPSON" "SCANNER GT-7000" "processor"
>>  doc/descriptions/epson.desc::scsi "EPSON" "Perfection1200" "processor"
>>  doc/descriptions/epson.desc::scsi "EPSON" "Perfection636" "processor"
>>  doc/descriptions/epson.desc::scsi "EPSON" "Perfection1200" "processor"
>>
>> already.  Are you talking about other models?
> 
> Yes, they have a patch for "Expression800" in addition.  My assumption
> is it would be an issue with any SCSI-only EPSON scanner?  Or is there
> a small subset of names all models use?

Hadn't heard about that one, I'll add that to epkowa.desc as well then.
 Assume it is for the Expression 800 only and not for its Japanese
cousin the GT-9600.

To be honest, I don't know what the various EPSON scanners with a SCSI
interface report.  Apparently, most advertise themselves as a "scanner"
device so no special handling should be required.  Some models however
think that they are "processors" and need the :scsi entry.  What names
these models report, I don't know, so I will have to rely on whatever
people report.

>>> Mostly, the epson2.desc values are driven by epkowa developers from
>>> their epkowa.desc.  Would it be possible for epkowa developers to
>>> provide a ":scsi" line for all SCSI devices?
>> Yes.  No promises on a release time line but we could send a diff to the
>> list and ask someone with the necessary privileges to commit.
> 
> My understanding is that epson2.desc updates are automated based on
> epkowa.desc updates.

As m. allen noah also pointed out, that's living life dangerously.

Hope this helps,
- --
Olaf Meeuwissen, LPIC-2           FLOSS Engineer -- AVASYS CORPORATION
FSF Associate Member #1962               Help support software freedom
                 http://www.fsf.org/jf?referrer=1962
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkuNokkACgkQt5qrxaZLMnKGHwCfSV3RwAYAH7jNDdU4I3JNQ3cq
OBsAniu9ediwU8iaiJ81iNfQMvGW1mcB
=FgQf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----