Re: [9fans] Scanners

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[erik quanstrom]

On Thu Nov 26 01:43:11 EST 2009, sam@nipl.net wrote:
> I don't know how hideously complicated it would be, to implement a module
> interface that would support loading linux modules into whatever other OS such
> as Plan 9.  I suppose it would be vastly simpler than something like "wine" for
> example.

letting along problems of cross compliation from gcc, or whatever,
you'd still be wrong.  the internal linux apis change with every . release.

- erik

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[ron minnich]

On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 5:06 AM, erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net> wrote:

> letting along problems of cross compliation from gcc, or whatever,
> you'd still be wrong.  the internal linux apis change with every . release.

They change basically biweekly. It's not fun and it's not fun to find.
We once had a 2-line change to the mmu code subtly break our own
driver, which subtly broke an HPC machine. Not fun at all.

ron

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[matt]

I did start work on getting my USB scanner working on plan9.

I have an agfa 1212u which is USB.

I got a USB sniffer for Windows and the SANE code and was going through
it byte by byte. I had it uploading the firmware and could make the
scanning arm move.

/n/sources/contrib/maht/spanscan.iso

I think I might even have it doing preview scan but not interpreting the
data, I forget, it was two years ago.

another one of those things on the list of 'I must go back to that'

If anyone knows of a decent free USB sniffer for Linux / BSD then that
would help anyone wanting to do this.

Matt

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[matt]

/n/sources/contrib/maht/snapscan.iso

if you didn't work out the typo

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[Steve Simon]

> Which is good, because I for one have never been able to get aquarela
> working properly.

I have used it quite a few times in the past. however every so often
I do find some weird part of the SMB spec which is not implemeted. That
said it usually works well.

I am happy to look at reports of problems as I have had dealings with
the CIFS protocol in the past.

-Steve

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[Enrico Weigelt]

* Sam Watkins <sam@nipl.net> wrote:

Hi,

> I don't know how hideously complicated it would be, to implement
> a module interface that would support loading linux modules into
> whatever other OS such as Plan 9.

Wouldn't it be easier (and maybe more robust) to run an specially
tailored linux kernel in an VM ? Something like Xen guests with
PCI devices routed to them ?


cu
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt, metux IT service -- http://www.metux.de/

 phone:  +49 36207 519931  email: weigelt@metux.de
 mobile: +49 174 7066481   icq:   210169427         skype: nekrad666
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 Embedded-Linux / Portierung / Opensource-QM / Verteilte Systeme
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[Enrico Weigelt]

* Jorden Mauro <jrm8005@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi,

> Has anyone given thought/attempted to getting newer scanners to work
> on Plan 9? Perhaps the SANE library could be used as a base for
> something saner (if you'll forgive the pun).

IMHO the first good step would be teaching SANE to speak 9P
(as replacement for its own protocol), then split it off into
several packages - moving drivers to their own processes and
step by step port the whole thing to Plan9 (maybe through the
linux emulation).

Maybe this could be combined with my suggested 9P camera stuff ;-)


cu
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt, metux IT service -- http://www.metux.de/

 phone:  +49 36207 519931  email: weigelt@metux.de
 mobile: +49 174 7066481   icq:   210169427         skype: nekrad666
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 Embedded-Linux / Portierung / Opensource-QM / Verteilte Systeme
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[Enrico Weigelt]

* Anthony Sorace <anothy@gmail.com> wrote:
> where's my ethernet mouse? ;-)

Well, it already would be a good start if mice spoke 9P ;-)
(actually, that's what we're going to do on software/driver
side in the gpm-ng project)


cu
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt, metux IT service -- http://www.metux.de/

 phone:  +49 36207 519931  email: weigelt@metux.de
 mobile: +49 174 7066481   icq:   210169427         skype: nekrad666
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 Embedded-Linux / Portierung / Opensource-QM / Verteilte Systeme
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[lucio]

> This may vary by device type, I think I
> heard Linux framebuffer driver source was most useful to developers
> of one OS.

As a NetBSD user, I found the ISDN drivers in Linux considerably
easier to read than the FreeBSD ones (NetBSD didn't include them at
the time).  I think NetBSD's philosophy of drawing a very clear
boundary between machine-dependent and machine-indepndent comes
closest to Plan 9; unfortunately, NetBSD is a bit more strict in its
application: Plan 9 prefers the device drivers to be entirely in the
machine-dependent space.  Bottom line, both NetBSD and Plan 9 take
their philosophy too far and neither can learn from the other.

Which is why Linux drivers become the examples to follow :-)

++L

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[W B Hacker]

Anthony Sorace wrote:
> there's a group called Rosetta that came out of another meeting at the GSoC
> mentor's summit for non-linux OS users (good meeting, although not quite as
> amusing as the "Troll Like a Pro" session). the folks at the meeting all thought
> their biggest problem was lack of driver support, and the Rosetta group is an
> effort to define a way to address that.
>
> they kinda started by re-defining UDI without realizing it, but since have. the
> group was dominated by *bsd folks, but we're not the only oddballs involved.
> we'll see if we can get anything useful out of it. hopefully something more
> manageable than UDI.
>
>

Given that the four BSD's don't even grok each other's disklabels or UFS all
that well, I'll not hold my breath while awaiting miracles...

Given FAT(n)'s limitations, it is a tad ironic that one of the more 'universal'
fs (long name, case-sensitive, and UTF-8 capable) with which to share portable
HDD/flash between and among Mac and all of the other *BSD's is ...

ext2...

:-(

.. and perhaps Fossil?

;-)

Bill

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[Anthony Sorace]

there's a group called Rosetta that came out of another meeting at the GSoC
mentor's summit for non-linux OS users (good meeting, although not quite as
amusing as the "Troll Like a Pro" session). the folks at the meeting all thought
their biggest problem was lack of driver support, and the Rosetta group is an
effort to define a way to address that.

they kinda started by re-defining UDI without realizing it, but since have. the
group was dominated by *bsd folks, but we're not the only oddballs involved.
we'll see if we can get anything useful out of it. hopefully something more
manageable than UDI.

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[erik quanstrom]

> 'half again as large' ?? or half the *BSD size?

half the size

> I'd sooner recommend OpenBSD or NetBSD. Better average quality, more long-term
> consistent interfaces.

i have no interest.  the compatability stuff will likely
be as large as the current port directory.

- erik

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[W B Hacker]

erik quanstrom wrote:

*snip*

>
> useless observation:
> it's fun to see the linux guys bragging about how their drivers are so
> small.  bsd drivers are typically half their size.  plan 9 drivers are typically
> half again as large.  to be fair, plan 9 drivers typicall give up things like
> tso.
>
> - erik
>
>

'half again as large' ?? or half the *BSD size?

And no - not at all 'useless' information.

To anyone accustomed to ASM or Forth, smaller (and still functional, of course)
indicates a better understanding of the task at hand, more throurough
exploration of the 'needfuls', and more effort sweating-out whatever desn't add
value. Worthwhile, all.

'Useless' OTOH, would be to try to use moving-kludge-Linux drivers as a model.

I'd sooner recommend OpenBSD or NetBSD. Better average quality, more long-term
consistent interfaces.

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[erik quanstrom]

> But take note of Haiku's move to make their OS capable of using *BSD drivers.
>
> That sort of adapter layer seems worthwhile, even if the results do not
> initially approach 'native' performance.
>
> *After* the dust settles (who woulda thunk, on apparent 'merit' or lack thereof,
> that the dodgy Realtek silicon would ever have become soooo ubiquitous?)
>
> ..THEN 'native' drivers could be gone after for the much smaller subset of
> 'common survivors'. IOW, better a slow, or feature-stripped driver than none at
> all.

i have known about haiku (and a few other oses) using bsd drivers.
i'm sure that most everyone who writes drivesrs for plan 9 knows about
this too.

one of the chief advantages of plan 9 is that it can be understood by
one person.  if you drag sk_bufs and all that other goo into the kernel,
you dimish one of plan 9's chief advantages by a considerable amount.

also there is a lot to be gained by writing one's own driver.  it pays to
understand the hardware, especially if you depend on it.  you may
have to fix some critical bugs.  i know some of the hardware that coraid
uses has some fixes that i know linux does not have.

useless observation:
it's fun to see the linux guys bragging about how their drivers are so
small.  bsd drivers are typically half their size.  plan 9 drivers are typically
half again as large.  to be fair, plan 9 drivers typicall give up things like
tso.

- erik

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[Ethan Grammatikidis]

>> If Plan9 can 'plumb' a remote sound card, (a questionable example
>> long
>> publicized) I'm sure it can do so with a mouse.
>
> it isn't plumbing, but export/import, and it's useful.
> i had a usable sound system on my r3000 indigo, but my PC had none.
> on the pc, i imported the indigo's /dev and played sounds that way.
> i could imagine uses even a continent away (alarm system imports
> remote
> /dev and announces trouble). next door might be more useful.

Another useful example is drawterm.

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[Ethan Grammatikidis]

On 26 Nov 2009, at 9:25 am, Charles Forsyth wrote:

>> I don't know how hideously complicated it would be, to implement a
>> module
>> interface that would support loading linux modules into whatever
>> other OS
>> such as Plan 9.
>
> only as hideously complicated as the linux kernel interfaces might be,
> but sadly those are indeed hideously complicated. try tracing the
> source
> of a driver you care about (because that's the only way to help
> guess how
> the undocumented hardware might work). good luck. see you later.
> (much later.)
>
Indeed. Overheard in #plan9 recently: "Reading Linux driver source
code is where the fun stops." This may vary by device type, I think I
heard Linux framebuffer driver source was most useful to developers
of one OS.

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[Charles Forsyth]

>Reality is that the rate of introduction/change of hardware/silicon is too fast
>for any small - or even 'medium sized' team (FreeBSD for example) to keep up
>with on their own... and that gap is widening.

that's not usually the biggest problem, although it's true that lack of time
can be a problem: it's the lack of (reasonably) accurate
documentation (independent of the source of some convoluted driver written by
someone who clearly doesn't do it for fun).
in the days when you could download a register-level description from
such-and-such a manufacturer, given enough incentive it was only a matter of time
and effort to drive the chip. now, a fairly non-trivial psychic ability is needed too.

i don't know why i'm replying to these. this topic has been re-hashed
periodically, and if anyone is keen actually to implement any of these helpful bits of advice
to test their ideas, i'm sure iwp9 would be a great venue to show the results.

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[Charles Forsyth]

> I don't know how hideously complicated it would be, to implement a module
> interface that would support loading linux modules into whatever other OS
> such as Plan 9.

only as hideously complicated as the linux kernel interfaces might be,
but sadly those are indeed hideously complicated. try tracing the source
of a driver you care about (because that's the only way to help guess how
the undocumented hardware might work). good luck. see you later. (much later.)

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[W B Hacker]

erik quanstrom wrote:
>> But it IS a bit frustrating to see drivers available in one F/OSS OS (or
>> variant) and not another, more especially as they are nearly always written in
>> reasonably portable 'C' code these many years.
>
> that's easier said than done.  Blocks are not the same as sk_bufs.
> for that matter, they're not the same as MsgBufs or RingBufs.

Aware.

But take note of Haiku's move to make their OS capable of using *BSD drivers.

That sort of adapter layer seems worthwhile, even if the results do not
initially approach 'native' performance.

*After* the dust settles (who woulda thunk, on apparent 'merit' or lack thereof,
that the dodgy Realtek silicon would ever have become soooo ubiquitous?)

..THEN 'native' drivers could be gone after for the much smaller subset of
'common survivors'. IOW, better a slow, or feature-stripped driver than none at
all.

>
>> Reality is that the rate of introduction/change of hardware/silicon is too fast
>> for any small - or even 'medium sized' team (FreeBSD for example) to keep up
>> with on their own... and that gap is widening.
>
> that's only a problem if one's goal is to support all possible
> hardware.
>
> - erik
>
>

Not a goal I'd seek - nor even lcose to it.

It is not really a problem if, for example, one says there is only a VESA 2 (or
later) driver for video - so long as it is a good one, as Plan9 is not really a
GUI-centric OS in the first place. More akin to ncurses with a precocious mouse.

;-)

Bill

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[Sam Watkins]

On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 05:51:37PM +1100, Sam Watkins wrote:
> also perhaps it would be possible to run modules in userland, again drivers
> needing access to direct memory-mapped devices and not doing that through the
> kernel might be a problem.

sorry for repeated posting!  apparently this "DUSK" project is relevant:
  http://www.slideshare.net/alexeysmirnov/dusk-develop-at-userland-install-into-kernel

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[Sam Watkins]

On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 05:43:35PM +1100, Sam Watkins wrote:
> I don't know how hideously complicated it would be, to implement a module
> interface that would support loading linux modules into whatever other OS
> such as Plan 9.

also perhaps it would be possible to run modules in userland, again drivers
needing access to direct memory-mapped devices and not doing that through the
kernel might be a problem.

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[Sam Watkins]

I don't know how hideously complicated it would be, to implement a module
interface that would support loading linux modules into whatever other OS such
as Plan 9.  I suppose it would be vastly simpler than something like "wine" for
example.  I think that would be useful, because so many devices are supported
under linux before other OSes.  I'm not experienced at kernel programming, so
there may be issues with memory mappings and such that would make it impossible
to get some modules working in this fashion.  I guess it might be possible
though.

Sam

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[erik quanstrom]

> But it IS a bit frustrating to see drivers available in one F/OSS OS (or
> variant) and not another, more especially as they are nearly always written in
> reasonably portable 'C' code these many years.

that's easier said than done.  Blocks are not the same as sk_bufs.
for that matter, they're not the same as MsgBufs or RingBufs.

> Reality is that the rate of introduction/change of hardware/silicon is too fast
> for any small - or even 'medium sized' team (FreeBSD for example) to keep up
> with on their own... and that gap is widening.

that's only a problem if one's goal is to support all possible
hardware.

- erik

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[W B Hacker]

erik quanstrom wrote:
>> 'export/import' applied to remote resources - especially 'scarce' or expensive
>> ones (sound cards no longer are..) that could *send back* the results might make
>> a better present-day example.
>
> the resource i want is generally particuarly scarce;
> there is often just one device that will do.
>
> i often import the aoe device of a machine on a
> storage network, for example.  i think thinking
> that all doo-dads with capability x are equivalent
> is a mistake, or a misunderstanding of "capability".

There you go.  A better example, IMNSHO, than SB16-equiv.

And there just *have to be*  another dozen 'modern' examples lying about.. taken
for granted by 9fans perhaps - but there's the rub...

Hiding a whole light-show under a bushel, if you will.

...meanwhile, other newcomers are involved in reinventing the networking,
clustering, 'sharing' capability - and not necessarily all that well - that
Plan9 started life with...

>
>> I'm well aware that 'marketing' Plan9 is not really on anyone's radar here ..
>> but there could be a bit more done to convey the availability and value to the
>> like-minded potential fellow-travelers [1]. One benefit might include more
>> current device driver import/devel..
>
> funny you should mention that.
>
> - erik
>
>

Sad to say, all the drivers I have ever written were in octal, ASM, or LMI Forth
(with ncc), so I'm not in any way 'current' myself.

But it IS a bit frustrating to see drivers available in one F/OSS OS (or
variant) and not another, more especially as they are nearly always written in
reasonably portable 'C' code these many years.

Reality is that the rate of introduction/change of hardware/silicon is too fast
for any small - or even 'medium sized' team (FreeBSD for example) to keep up
with on their own... and that gap is widening.

Bill

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[W B Hacker]

Anthony Sorace wrote:
>  erik  wrote:
> // how to troll like a pro!
>
> see, i was paying attention!
>
> bill wrote:
> // ...a questionable example...
>
> if you have a lab of terminals but only one or two have a working
> sound card and speakers, it can make good sense.

I'm sure it did *at the time*...

But have you tried to find even an embedded nano board that has in-bridge-chip
audio codec's lately? Where 'lately' is now around ten years-plus? And
'speakers' have becoem tiny, effective - and also very cheap?

We've been chopping-off audio jacks on C3 & C7 MB for years to make quite decent
low-power 1U servers... too tall for the case otherwise.

PITA, that, but we don't use enough of 'em to order them 'unstuffed'.

> first time i saw
> that was a demo for something unrelated; we were in the real demo
> before we'd realized what we'd done to get there.
>
>

ACK .. but time marches on, and there *must* be a few 'shareable' things more
current than SB equivalents. How / why not get those examples onto the web page
as add-ons if not more germane replacements?

DISCLAIMER:

My audio gear largely sez 'Marantz' on the front panel, some dates as far back
as 1968, only the CD drive is newer than 1975, and CD aside, has SQRT-FA to do
with computers. Still sounds sweet though.

"Horses for courses"


Bill

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[erik quanstrom]

> 'export/import' applied to remote resources - especially 'scarce' or expensive
> ones (sound cards no longer are..) that could *send back* the results might make
> a better present-day example.

the resource i want is generally particuarly scarce;
there is often just one device that will do.

i often import the aoe device of a machine on a
storage network, for example.  i think thinking
that all doo-dads with capability x are equivalent
is a mistake, or a misunderstanding of "capability".

> I'm well aware that 'marketing' Plan9 is not really on anyone's radar here ..
> but there could be a bit more done to convey the availability and value to the
> like-minded potential fellow-travelers [1]. One benefit might include more
> current device driver import/devel..

funny you should mention that.

- erik

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[W B Hacker]

Charles Forsyth wrote:
>> If Plan9 can 'plumb' a remote sound card, (a questionable example long
>> publicized) I'm sure it can do so with a mouse.
>
> it isn't plumbing, but export/import, and it's useful.
> i had a usable sound system on my r3000 indigo, but my PC had none.
> on the pc, i imported the indigo's /dev and played sounds that way.
> i could imagine uses even a continent away (alarm system imports remote
> /dev and announces trouble). next door might be more useful.
>
>

Welll - in the same room, it would seem 'sneakernet' would do well enough. Point
of fact, I use three kdb,vid,mouse and ... a swivel chair... less confusing than
sharing/switching among three disparate OS'en.

;-)

And I've actually considered remote audio I/O as part of a system for monitoring
a house that sits empty for months at a time, and responding to the doorbell ..
intrusion, et al ... but.. 'edge cases', both, if ever were. Easy enough to do
without Plan9. 'Too easy' to be fair.

'export/import' applied to remote resources - especially 'scarce' or expensive
ones (sound cards no longer are..) that could *send back* the results might make
a better present-day example.

If we could identify a few...

Couple of thoughts:

- hardware crypto devices  (cheap and cheerful in recent VIA CPU, seldom seen
otherwise)

- fast, specialty (expensive) graphics processing engines for storage to file,
or streaming-back not (necessarily) remote display. Ray tracing comes to mind...

- a 'ration' - free or purchased - of grid or supercomputing resources? (several
experts here - I'm not among them)

In any case, given that audio codecs are near-as-dammit ubiquitous on commodity,
and even 'server grade' and 'embedded' system boards these many years, I think a
better example than sharing a Soundblaster-equivalent is overdue.

I'm well aware that 'marketing' Plan9 is not really on anyone's radar here ..
but there could be a bit more done to convey the availability and value to the
like-minded potential fellow-travelers [1]. One benefit might include more
current device driver import/devel..

JM2CW

Bill

[1] FWIW - the 'Blue Gene' Plan9 work deserves better publicity. If/as/when one
hears that a certain 'hobby' alleged-OS is being run on such expensive kit, one
tends to question why it was even built...

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[Anthony Sorace]

 erik  wrote:
// how to troll like a pro!

see, i was paying attention!

bill wrote:
// ...a questionable example...

if you have a lab of terminals but only one or two have a working
sound card and speakers, it can make good sense. first time i saw
that was a demo for something unrelated; we were in the real demo
before we'd realized what we'd done to get there.

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[cinap_lenrek]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 282 bytes --]

what is the sense of this discussion by the way? here are no scanner drivers
for plan9 right know. nobody seems to be working at one.

nobody cares if you dont like the solutions/hacks to the problem.

so just stop this thread and write a driver if you need one.

--
cinap

[-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 4257 bytes --]

From: "Peter A. Cejchan" <tyapca7@gmail.com>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
Subject: Re: [9fans] Scanners
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 17:43:47 +0100
Message-ID: <e56a31560911250843q29ceba2aj76680554c41f3ddd@mail.gmail.com>

> No need for spezial software except a Cifs Server.
> The scanner use smbclient.



i repeat: i do not wish to have anything to do with windoze os, nor
with smb and other bullshit. sorry for such a rude wording... windoze
annoyed me along with other proprietary sw 20+ yrs.... i do share all
my outcome publicly... yes, i'm not a millionaire (and my outcome is
humble, YES), but several people already acknowledged my work... BTW,
if you read up to this point, i would design a book scanner in an
other way, especially, no parallel (to scanning lamp) covering glass,
but, rather, a roof-like glass construction *( to avoid book damage)
and a mirror + sw to convert it to rectangular page.... just my two
cents ;-)

sry if it's offending, but i'd like to see an open specification for
any , be it desktop, scanner. BTW, i consider supporting ONLY windoze
a violation of a free business contest law, IMHO....

sry 1 more, i just wted 2 know anybody uses a scnr on NATIVE p9....

++pac

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[Charles Forsyth]

>If Plan9 can 'plumb' a remote sound card, (a questionable example long
>publicized) I'm sure it can do so with a mouse.

it isn't plumbing, but export/import, and it's useful.
i had a usable sound system on my r3000 indigo, but my PC had none.
on the pc, i imported the indigo's /dev and played sounds that way.
i could imagine uses even a continent away (alarm system imports remote
/dev and announces trouble). next door might be more useful.

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[W B Hacker]

Anthony Sorace wrote:
> where's my ethernet mouse? ;-)

If Plan9 can 'plumb' a remote sound card, (a questionable example long
publicized) I'm sure it can do so with a mouse.

'Questionable example', as I've never quite understood how I'd be able to hear
the output of a sound card whose physically-attached speakers where half-way
round the world (can we also 'plumb' the analog audio?) - even before the Tet
'68 offensive took away much of my hearing.

;-)

Bill


>
> On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 12:20, erik quanstrom <quanstro@coraid.com> wrote:
>>> That's neat. It makes sense too, using ethernet almost always seems a
>>> better deal than using USB.
>> coraid agrees.  except for the "almost" part.
>>
>> - erik
>>
>>
>
>

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[ron minnich]

On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 9:47 AM, Anthony Sorace <anothy@gmail.com> wrote:
> where's my ethernet mouse? ;-)

I thought it was called drawterm.

ron

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[Brian L. Stuart]

> > to having cifs as an option.  But when did it become
> popular
> > to say that ftp should not be an option for
> transferring a file?
> 
> The basic little flatbed on the website can scan to FTP.
> I'm not sure
> why the original poster chose to mention SMB and not FTP,
> but it's an
> option.

DOH!  That's what I get for opening my mouth before checking
things out.

Sorry for the noise,
BLS

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[erik quanstrom]

On Wed Nov 25 12:49:12 EST 2009, anothy@gmail.com wrote:
> where's my ethernet mouse? ;-)
>

how to troll like a pro!

- erik

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[Anthony Sorace]

where's my ethernet mouse? ;-)

On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 12:20, erik quanstrom <quanstro@coraid.com> wrote:
>> That's neat. It makes sense too, using ethernet almost always seems a
>> better deal than using USB.
>
> coraid agrees.  except for the "almost" part.
>
> - erik
>
>

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[erik quanstrom]

> That's neat. It makes sense too, using ethernet almost always seems a
> better deal than using USB.

coraid agrees.  except for the "almost" part.

- erik

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[hiro]

I'm using a comparable system here. I have to retrieve the scans with
a web interface (but as you say, better than nothing).
Standards...

On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 6:04 PM, Brian L. Stuart <blstuart@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>> > The scanner ist connect via 1G ethernet.
>> > On the Touchscreen  is an Option "Scan to network".
>> > The scanner scans direct to a cifs share (aquarella on
>> plan9).
>> > No need for spezial software except a Cifs Server.
>> > The scanner use smbclient.
>>
>> That's neat. It makes sense too, using ethernet almost
>> always seems a
>> better deal than using USB. It's so cheap to put a network
>> stack and
>> ethernet into these devices, and the network stack is
>> doubtless less
>> software than a USB stack ...
>
> I definitely agree with this part of it.  However, I would much
> rather see the higher-level protocol be something that is simpler
> and not tied to any commercial interests.  I don't even object
> to having cifs as an option.  But when did it become popular
> to say that ftp should not be an option for transferring a file?
>
> BLS
>
>
>

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[John Floren]

On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 12:04 PM, Brian L. Stuart
<blstuart@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>> > The scanner ist connect via 1G ethernet.
>> > On the Touchscreen  is an Option "Scan to network".
>> > The scanner scans direct to a cifs share (aquarella on
>> plan9).
>> > No need for spezial software except a Cifs Server.
>> > The scanner use smbclient.
>>
>> That's neat. It makes sense too, using ethernet almost
>> always seems a
>> better deal than using USB. It's so cheap to put a network
>> stack and
>> ethernet into these devices, and the network stack is
>> doubtless less
>> software than a USB stack ...
>
> I definitely agree with this part of it.  However, I would much
> rather see the higher-level protocol be something that is simpler
> and not tied to any commercial interests.  I don't even object
> to having cifs as an option.  But when did it become popular
> to say that ftp should not be an option for transferring a file?
>
> BLS
>
>
>

The basic little flatbed on the website can scan to FTP. I'm not sure
why the original poster chose to mention SMB and not FTP, but it's an
option.

Which is good, because I for one have never been able to get aquarela
working properly.

John
-- 
"Object-oriented design is the roman numerals of computing" -- Rob Pike

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[Brian L. Stuart]

> > The scanner ist connect via 1G ethernet.
> > On the Touchscreen  is an Option "Scan to network".
> > The scanner scans direct to a cifs share (aquarella on
> plan9).
> > No need for spezial software except a Cifs Server.
> > The scanner use smbclient.
> 
> That's neat. It makes sense too, using ethernet almost
> always seems a
> better deal than using USB. It's so cheap to put a network
> stack and
> ethernet into these devices, and the network stack is
> doubtless less
> software than a USB stack ...

I definitely agree with this part of it.  However, I would much
rather see the higher-level protocol be something that is simpler
and not tied to any commercial interests.  I don't even object
to having cifs as an option.  But when did it become popular
to say that ftp should not be an option for transferring a file?

BLS

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[Jack Norton]

Peter A. Cejchan wrote:
>> No need for spezial software except a Cifs Server.
>> The scanner use smbclient.
>
>
>
> i repeat: i do not wish to have anything to do with windoze os, nor
> with smb and other bullshit. sorry for such a rude wording... windoze
> annoyed me along with other proprietary sw 20+ yrs.... i do share all
> my outcome publicly... yes, i'm not a millionaire (and my outcome is
> humble, YES), but several people already acknowledged my work... BTW,
> if you read up to this point, i would design a book scanner in an
> other way, especially, no parallel (to scanning lamp) covering glass,
> but, rather, a roof-like glass construction *( to avoid book damage)
> and a mirror + sw to convert it to rectangular page.... just my two
> cents ;-)
>
> sry if it's offending, but i'd like to see an open specification for
> any , be it desktop, scanner. BTW, i consider supporting ONLY windoze
> a violation of a free business contest law, IMHO....
>
> sry 1 more, i just wted 2 know anybody uses a scnr on NATIVE p9....
>
> ++pac
>

I checked out the image access site, and it looks like you can scan to
FTP, email (built in MTA?), along with the smb method.
I actually think thats pretty nice.
What on earth is free business contest law (FBCL I suppose)?  Does that
mean if I only make parts for Ford motor cars, and I completely ignore
GM, and also the vast league of Kit Car DIY'ers, I am evil?
I like the book scanner idea though, you should jump on that.  Much more
elegant in my opinion to the 'book open, face up' with camera's from
afar method.

-Jack

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[ron minnich]

On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 6:28 AM, Andreas Zell <zell@imageaccess.de> wrote:

> The scanner ist connect via 1G ethernet.
> On the Touchscreen  is an Option "Scan to network".
> The scanner scans direct to a cifs share (aquarella on plan9).
> No need for spezial software except a Cifs Server.
> The scanner use smbclient.

That's neat. It makes sense too, using ethernet almost always seems a
better deal than using USB. It's so cheap to put a network stack and
ethernet into these devices, and the network stack is doubtless less
software than a USB stack ...

ron

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[Peter A. Cejchan]

i dont understand you.... sry...

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[Peter A. Cejchan]

> No need for spezial software except a Cifs Server.
> The scanner use smbclient.



i repeat: i do not wish to have anything to do with windoze os, nor
with smb and other bullshit. sorry for such a rude wording... windoze
annoyed me along with other proprietary sw 20+ yrs.... i do share all
my outcome publicly... yes, i'm not a millionaire (and my outcome is
humble, YES), but several people already acknowledged my work... BTW,
if you read up to this point, i would design a book scanner in an
other way, especially, no parallel (to scanning lamp) covering glass,
but, rather, a roof-like glass construction *( to avoid book damage)
and a mirror + sw to convert it to rectangular page.... just my two
cents ;-)

sry if it's offending, but i'd like to see an open specification for
any , be it desktop, scanner. BTW, i consider supporting ONLY windoze
a violation of a free business contest law, IMHO....

sry 1 more, i just wted 2 know anybody uses a scnr on NATIVE p9....

++pac

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[hiro]

Well, heroin is a lot of fun.

On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 3:33 PM, Jorden Mauro <jrm8005@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 9:28 AM, Andreas Zell <zell@imageaccess.de> wrote:
>> On 25 Nov., 13:34, tyap...@gmail.com (Peter A. Cejchan) wrote:
>>> On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 1:20 PM, Peter A. Cejchan <tyap...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> > if i understand it right, your scanner is NOT connected directly to a
>>> > plan9 native box...
>>>
>>> > ++pac
>>>
>>> this is from your web:
>>> Requirement - Software:         Java Sun Microsystems; Operating System
>>> Windows 2000, Windows XP, Windows Vista
>>>
>>> i got rid from those fsck-ing windoze os several yrs ago, now i want
>>> to free last of my boxes still running linux...uggh
>>> ++pac
>>
>> The scanner ist connect via 1G ethernet.
>> On the Touchscreen  is an Option "Scan to network".
>> The scanner scans direct to a cifs share (aquarella on plan9).
>> No need for spezial software except a Cifs Server.
>> The scanner use smbclient.
>>
>>
>> AZ.
>>
>>
>
> Not a fun solution if you've already bought a scanner...
>
>

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[hiro]

I heard that you can free linux with a GNU.

On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 1:26 PM, Peter A. Cejchan <tyapca7@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 1:20 PM, Peter A. Cejchan <tyapca7@gmail.com> wrote:
>> if i understand it right, your scanner is NOT connected directly to a
>> plan9 native box...
>>
>> ++pac
>>
>
> this is from your web:
> Requirement - Software:         Java Sun Microsystems; Operating System
> Windows 2000, Windows XP, Windows Vista
>
> i got rid from those fsck-ing windoze os several yrs ago, now i want
> to free last of my boxes still running linux...uggh
> ++pac
>
>

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[Jorden Mauro]

On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 9:28 AM, Andreas Zell <zell@imageaccess.de> wrote:
> On 25 Nov., 13:34, tyap...@gmail.com (Peter A. Cejchan) wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 1:20 PM, Peter A. Cejchan <tyap...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > if i understand it right, your scanner is NOT connected directly to a
>> > plan9 native box...
>>
>> > ++pac
>>
>> this is from your web:
>> Requirement - Software:         Java Sun Microsystems; Operating System
>> Windows 2000, Windows XP, Windows Vista
>>
>> i got rid from those fsck-ing windoze os several yrs ago, now i want
>> to free last of my boxes still running linux...uggh
>> ++pac
>
> The scanner ist connect via 1G ethernet.
> On the Touchscreen  is an Option "Scan to network".
> The scanner scans direct to a cifs share (aquarella on plan9).
> No need for spezial software except a Cifs Server.
> The scanner use smbclient.
>
>
> AZ.
>
>

Not a fun solution if you've already bought a scanner...

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[Andreas Zell]

On 25 Nov., 13:34, tyap...@gmail.com (Peter A. Cejchan) wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 1:20 PM, Peter A. Cejchan <tyap...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > if i understand it right, your scanner is NOT connected directly to a
> > plan9 native box...
>
> > ++pac
>
> this is from your web:
> Requirement - Software:         Java Sun Microsystems; Operating System
> Windows 2000, Windows XP, Windows Vista
>
> i got rid from those fsck-ing windoze os several yrs ago, now i want
> to free last of my boxes still running linux...uggh
> ++pac

The scanner ist connect via 1G ethernet.
On the Touchscreen  is an Option "Scan to network".
The scanner scans direct to a cifs share (aquarella on plan9).
No need for spezial software except a Cifs Server.
The scanner use smbclient.


AZ.

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[Jorden Mauro]

On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 11:08 PM, erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net> wrote:
>> Has anyone given thought/attempted to getting newer scanners to work
>> on Plan 9? Perhaps the SANE library could be used as a base for
>> something saner (if you'll forgive the pun).
>
> i thought that was irony.  :-)
>
> - erik
>
>

Here's your irony:

P9 needs more APIs with TLAs and FLAs to make it more marketable.

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[Peter A. Cejchan]

On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 1:20 PM, Peter A. Cejchan <tyapca7@gmail.com> wrote:
> if i understand it right, your scanner is NOT connected directly to a
> plan9 native box...
>
> ++pac
>

this is from your web:
Requirement - Software:  	Java Sun Microsystems; Operating System
Windows 2000, Windows XP, Windows Vista

i got rid from those fsck-ing windoze os several yrs ago, now i want
to free last of my boxes still running linux...uggh
++pac

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[Peter A. Cejchan]

if i understand it right, your scanner is NOT connected directly to a
plan9 native box...

++pac

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[Andreas Zell]

On 25 Nov., 10:50, tyap...@gmail.com (Peter A. Cejchan) wrote:
> nevertheless, nobody has a working scanner on plan9 ??
> ++pac

We have working scanner.

www.imageaccess.de

You can use the Wt25,WT36,Wt42/48 and WT36DS Scanner.

Scan via Touchscreen and upload the images to a Plan9 cifs
networkshare.

AZ.

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[Peter A. Cejchan]

nevertheless, nobody has a working scanner on plan9 ??
++pac

Re: [9fans] Scanners

[erik quanstrom]

> Has anyone given thought/attempted to getting newer scanners to work
> on Plan 9? Perhaps the SANE library could be used as a base for
> something saner (if you'll forgive the pun).

i thought that was irony.  :-)

- erik

[9fans] Scanners

[Jorden Mauro]

I could only find this thread, which seems a little outdated in this
age of USB scanners: http://marc.info/?l=9fans&m=111558813208847&w=2

Has anyone given thought/attempted to getting newer scanners to work
on Plan 9? Perhaps the SANE library could be used as a base for
something saner (if you'll forgive the pun).