# Re: sane-0.69, finally!

David Mosberger-Tang (David.Mosberger@acm.org)
Thu, 22 Jan 1998 22:07:01 -0800

- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
- Next message: Roberto Cespa: "Page limit problem with Mustek 6000CZ"
- Previous message: David Mosberger-Tang: "Re: xerox settings for DINA4"
- In reply to: Martin Huber: "Re: sane-0.69, finally!"
- Next in thread: A. Leidenfrost: "Re: sane-0.69, finally!"
- Reply: A. Leidenfrost: "Re: sane-0.69, finally!"

>>>>> On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 23:29:14 +0100 (MET), Martin Huber <hu@garfield.m.isar.de> said:

Martin> I have found (and reported) a bug in the gcc 2.8.0 -O2
Martin> optimizer on Solaris 2.6 x86, which had not been there in
Martin> 2.7.2.3. Don't use O2 until this is fixed.

Martin> Solaris X86 can't compile the linux parallel port stuff

Martin> The new third parameter in (*handler)

Martin> It would be nice to have a pointer to
Martin> HAVE_SYS_SCSI_TARGETS_SCGIO_H in config.h.in

Both of these problems have been fixed now. The config.h.in patch is
below. I'll probably make sane-0.70 sometime soon to fix the various
minor bugs that have been found (and to add the SnapScan backend). If
you have anything else on your mind, speak up soon! ;-)

--david

--- config.h.in~ Tue Dec 23 23:45:21 1997
+++ config.h.in Thu Jan 22 21:00:10 1998
@@ -229,6 +229,12 @@
/* Define if you have the <sys/scsi.h> header file. */
#undef HAVE_SYS_SCSI_H
+/* Define if you have the <sys/scsi/targets/scgio.h> header file. */
+#undef HAVE_SYS_SCSI_TARGETS_SCGIO_H
+
+/* Define if you have the <sys/scsi/sgdefs.h> header file. */
+#undef HAVE_SYS_SCSI_SGDEFS_H
+
/* Define if you have the <sys/scsicmd.h> header file. */
#undef HAVE_SYS_SCSICMD_H

    --
    Source code, list archive, and docs: http://www.mostang.com/sane/
    To unsubscribe: echo unsubscribe sane-devel | mail majordomo@mostang.com

- Next message: Roberto Cespa: "Page limit problem with Mustek 6000CZ"
- Previous message: David Mosberger-Tang: "Re: xerox settings for DINA4"
- In reply to: Martin Huber: "Re: sane-0.69, finally!"
- Next in thread: A. Leidenfrost: "Re: sane-0.69, finally!"
- Reply: A. Leidenfrost: "Re: sane-0.69, finally!"