[Nottingham] Going inSANE???
david at familyaldred.org.uk
Sat Apr 30 16:17:18 BST 2005
On Thursday 28 April 2005 23:43, Graeme Fowler wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 23:01 +0100, David Aldred wrote:
> > It matches the details in the artec_eplus48u backend file. On a sudden
> > thought I just did
> > grep 0x4003 *
> > in the sane.d directory, and confirmed that *only* the artec_eplus48u
> > file lists this vendor/device combination.
> if you "less /proc/bus/usb/devices" do you see your device identified in
T: Bus=02 Lev=02 Prnt=02 Port=01 Cnt=01 Dev#= 4 Spd=12 MxCh= 0
D: Ver= 1.10 Cls=00(>ifc ) Sub=00 Prot=00 MxPS=64 #Cfgs= 1
P: Vendor=05d8 ProdID=4003 Rev= 1.00
C:* #Ifs= 1 Cfg#= 1 Atr=a0 MxPwr=500mA
I: If#= 0 Alt= 0 #EPs= 2 Cls=ff(vend.) Sub=ff Prot=ff Driver=(none)
E: Ad=81(I) Atr=02(Bulk) MxPS= 64 Ivl=0ms
E: Ad=02(O) Atr=02(Bulk) MxPS= 64 Ivl=0ms
> If you unplug it from the USB port, wait a minute or so to allow the
> hotplug subsystem to cool down, then plug it in again do you see
> anything interesting (or relevant) in /var/log/messages?
Apr 29 19:49:02 main kernel: usb 2-1.2: new full speed USB device using
ohci_hcd and address 4
Apr 29 19:49:03 main scannerdrake: ### Program is starting ###
Apr 29 19:49:04 main scannerdrake: ### Program is exiting ###
> You should see the hotplug system identify the device as attached, then
> match the driver to it.
It´s the matching thedriver' bit it seems to fail on!
The other oddity is that if I try using MCC to set it up manually, there is no
listing for the artec e+48u, although the .conf file is there and the scanner
is listed in conf.dll. I´d have thought MCC would get its list from
More information about the Nottingham