# Re: Umax 1200S on LinuxPPC R5

Oliver Rauch (oliver.rauch@Wolfsburg.DE)
Sat, 26 Jun 1999 20:55:41 +0200

- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
- Next message: Douglas Gilbert: "Re: Umax 1200S on LinuxPPC R5"
- Previous message: Oliver Rauch: "Re: Umax 1200S on LinuxPPC R5"
- Maybe in reply to: Simon Piette: "Umax 1200S on LinuxPPC R5"
- Next in thread: Douglas Gilbert: "Re: Umax 1200S on LinuxPPC R5"

Tom Martone wrote:

>
>
> perhaps is being a bit too restrictive. According to the SCSI spec,
> it seems that 0x71 is a valid value as well. 0x70 is a current error
> and 0x71 is a deferred error. Perhaps this is the value that Simon
> is getting?

The umax specs says only 0x70 is used!

> It would be real helpful if we could dump out the sense
> buffer :)
>

Could help,

I think there is the possibility to do this via sanei_scsi, or
am I wrong?

>
> I've also seen similar code written as:
> if ( result[0] & 0x80 )
> {
> /* sense buffer invalid */
> return SANE_STATUS_GOOD;
> }

That is bad because (how you write in another place)
this bit only says if the Information field (bytes 0x03-0x06)
is valid!

Bye
Oliver

    --
    EMAIL: Oliver.Rauch@Wolfsburg.DE
    WWW: http://www.wolfsburg.de/~rauch

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

     Next message: Douglas Gilbert: "Re: Umax 1200S on LinuxPPC R5"
     Previous message: Oliver Rauch: "Re: Umax 1200S on LinuxPPC R5"
     Maybe in reply to: Simon Piette: "Umax 1200S on LinuxPPC R5"

     Next in thread: Douglas Gilbert: "Re: Umax 1200S on LinuxPPC R5"