simple-scan-team team mailing list archive

[Michael Nagel <ubuntu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I suppose this is related to the hardware/driver in use.
Could you provide the following:
5. Always explicitly mention the full make and model of your scanner, e.g. "HP Deskjet F4580".
6. Always provide the id, that might be determined by running lsusb and pasting the corresponding line, that might look like "Bus 001 Device 004: ID 062a:900d Creative Labs". Do not paste the full list of all other USB devices. Adapt for SCSI scanners.

As for xsane and Simple Scan, I know that they are separate, but both
use sane/sane-backends/libsane, and that is separate from both. You say
that just exchanging Simple Scan on a Lucid System shows the problem, so
I conclude the problem is really in the Simple Scan code and not in
libsane.

** Changed in: simple-scan
       Status: New => Incomplete

** Changed in: simple-scan (Ubuntu)
       Status: New => Incomplete

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Simple
Scan Development Team, which is the registrant for Simple Scan.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/667220

Title:
  Regression from 1.0 to 2.32 - slower scan process

Status in Simple Scan:
  Incomplete
Status in “simple-scan” package in Ubuntu:
  Incomplete

Bug description:
  The 2.32 series seems to be slower on scanning than the 1.0.x series.
  This is because there is a longer break between scans, while the speed
  of the scanner is about the same. It seems that the UI is lagging
  behind the real process on the scanner, so the "cursor" on screen is
  about half of the scanned page while the image sensor already reached
  it's end position. Then the image sensor is waiting for the UI cursor
  to reach it's end before it returning to start. This results in a
  longer break between scans.

  This was not the case in 1.0.x and when scanning multiple pages it
  really slows things down.

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/simple-scan/+bug/667220/+subscriptions