Re: USB scanners and PR 50340

["Gary Duzan" <gary%duzan.org@localhost>]

In Message <rmih9g3tkij.fsf%fnord.ir.bbn.com@localhost>,
   Greg Troxel <gdt%ir.bbn.com@localhost>wrote:

=>Dave Tyson <dtyson%anduin.org.uk@localhost> writes:
=>
=>> I note that PR 50340 has been closed and with the latest pkgsrc
=>>under current (amd64) my Mustek 1200 UB scanner seems to work OK
=>>- but I have comment out the uscanner device in the kernel and use
=>>it as a ugen device. It seems that this is the 'new world order'
=>>and the sane backend code to handle uscanner devices is deprecated.
=>>Given this is the case is there any point in still keeping the
=>>
=>> uscanner* at uhub? port ?
=>>
=>> in GENERIC?
=>
=>Quite possibly we should remove (comment out) uscanner in GENERIC.
=>ulpt is more controversial, but cups wants to use libusb too.
=>
=>> I am of the same opinion as the PR originator that it is easier
=>>to control access permissions with a uscanner device rather than
=>>having to open up a whole raft of ugen devices, but I guess the
=>>sane developers feel that using libusb makes support easier...
=>
=>Perhaps if we had something called uscanner that would match scanners
=>and that libusb would fine, we could have the permissions management of
=>direct matching but the cope-with-the-rest-of-the-world benefit of
=>libusb.

   Can we not build some sort of bus-like device to which both the
specialized and generic devices can attach which prevents opening
both at the same time?

					Gary Duzan