Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 65178
sane does not identify my scanner
Last modified: 2008-05-01 11:38:02 EDT
From Bugzilla Helper: User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; CDonDemand; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011019 Netscape6/6.2 Description of problem: Ihave an hp scanner. Under 7.2 it worked fine. Under 7.3 I get message that no scan device is found. sane-find-scanner identifies the scanner. The /dev/sg0 permissions are set to allow anyone to access it. Scanimage, xscanimage, and Xsane all say there is no device attached. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1.run scanimage 2. 3. Actual Results: What can I say. I think the above note explains it. Expected Results: scanner should be identified Additional info:
Known issue. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 64964 ***
This turns out not to be a duplicate of bug #64964 after all.
To clarify this report, I believe the scanner is a HP C6720? Please attach output of: SANE_DEBUG_EPSON=129 scanimage -L
*** Bug 67116 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Oops, of course I meant the following: SANE_DEBUG_HP=128 scanimage -L (128, not 129; and HP, not EPSON)
Created attachment 61984 [details] resullts of debug with 1.0.5
Created attachment 61985 [details] results of debug with sane-backends.1.0.7-6.1 installed
Sorry to be so awkward in attaching the files. Basically, I ran the SANE_DEBUG_HP=128 scanimage -L under both sane-backends 1.0.5 and 1.0.7 for you. I am not sure you learn anything from them . The scanner is identified under 1.0.5 and no scanner is identified under 1.0.7. There are no more details in teh output. Under 1.0.5 there was considerable output to the terminal, but it did not show up in the file. The only output to the terminal under 1.0.7 was what you see in the file.
What does 'ls -l /dev/scanner' say? Also, what does 'rpm -V sane-backends' say?
ls -l /dev/scanner shows lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 8 May 18 15:18 /dev/scanner -> /dev/sg0 results of rpm -V sane-backends show: ....L... /usr/lib/sane/libsane-abaton.so.1 ....L... /usr/lib/sane/libsane-agfafocus.so.1 ....L... /usr/lib/sane/libsane-apple.so.1 ....L... /usr/lib/sane/libsane-artec.so.1 ....L... /usr/lib/sane/libsane-as6e.so.1 ....L... /usr/lib/sane/libsane-avision.so.1 ....L... /usr/lib/sane/libsane-bh.so.1 ....L... /usr/lib/sane/libsane-canon.so.1 ....L... /usr/lib/sane/libsane-coolscan.so.1 ....L... /usr/lib/sane/libsane-dc210.so.1 ....L... /usr/lib/sane/libsane-dc240.so.1 ....L... /usr/lib/sane/libsane-dc25.so.1 ....L... /usr/lib/sane/libsane-dll.so.1 ....L... /usr/lib/sane/libsane-dmc.so.1 ....L... /usr/lib/sane/libsane-epson.so.1 ....L... /usr/lib/sane/libsane-hp.so.1 ....L... /usr/lib/sane/libsane-m3096g.so.1 ....L... /usr/lib/sane/libsane-microtek.so.1 ....L... /usr/lib/sane/libsane-microtek2.so.1 ....L... /usr/lib/sane/libsane-mustek.so.1 ....L... /usr/lib/sane/libsane-mustek_pp.so.1 ....L... /usr/lib/sane/libsane-nec.so.1 ....L... /usr/lib/sane/libsane-net.so.1 ....L... /usr/lib/sane/libsane-pie.so.1 ....L... /usr/lib/sane/libsane-plustek.so.1 ....L... /usr/lib/sane/libsane-qcam.so.1 ....L... /usr/lib/sane/libsane-ricoh.so.1 ....L... /usr/lib/sane/libsane-s9036.so.1 ....L... /usr/lib/sane/libsane-sharp.so.1 ....L... /usr/lib/sane/libsane-snapscan.so.1 ....L... /usr/lib/sane/libsane-sp15c.so.1 ....L... /usr/lib/sane/libsane-st400.so.1 ....L... /usr/lib/sane/libsane-tamarack.so.1 ....L... /usr/lib/sane/libsane-umax.so.1 ....L... /usr/lib/sane/libsane-umax_pp.so.1 ....L... /usr/lib/sane/libsane-v4l.so.1
Created attachment 62184 [details] second run of rpm -V sane-backends with different result
I have it fixed. With the results of rpm -V I looked for libsane-hp.so.1 on my system and it did not exist. I therefore created a sym link for s0.1 to so.1.0.7. Now with libsane-hp.so.1 linked to libsane-hp.so.1.0.7 it runs. I reran rpm -V and the results are in the sane-backends.verify.txt that I uploaded. Interestingly, all but the libsane-hp.so.1 are listed as missing. I do not know why they all were not listed as "missing" in the first run of rpm -V that I did. For whatever reason none of the links were created even with the patch to 1.0.7-6. From my perspective this could be closed. I am able to scan, copy. Thanks for your time.
How odd. Well, glad it works now. Closing.