kopia lustrzana https://gitlab.com/sane-project/website
63 wiersze
2.9 KiB
HTML
63 wiersze
2.9 KiB
HTML
<!-- received="Mon Jul 19 09:46:15 1999 PDT" -->
|
|
<!-- sent="Mon, 19 Jul 1999 18:51:46 +0200 (CDT)" -->
|
|
<!-- name="Yuri Dario" -->
|
|
<!-- email="mc6530@mclink.it" -->
|
|
<!-- subject="Re: Microtek E3 won't scan, but II-G okay (SANE-OS/2)" -->
|
|
<!-- id="199907191656.SAA02477@tocai.nline.it" -->
|
|
<!-- inreplyto="199907182034.QAA16997@benz.tpk.net" -->
|
|
<title>sane-devel: Re: Microtek E3 won't scan, but II-G okay (SANE-OS/2)</title>
|
|
<h1>Re: Microtek E3 won't scan, but II-G okay (SANE-OS/2)</h1>
|
|
<b>Yuri Dario</b> (<a href="mailto:mc6530@mclink.it"><i>mc6530@mclink.it</i></a>)<br>
|
|
<i>Mon, 19 Jul 1999 18:51:46 +0200 (CDT)</i>
|
|
<p>
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<li> <b>Messages sorted by:</b> <a href="date.html#117">[ date ]</a><a href="index.html#117">[ thread ]</a><a href="subject.html#117">[ subject ]</a><a href="author.html#117">[ author ]</a>
|
|
<!-- next="start" -->
|
|
<li> <b>Next message:</b> <a href="0118.html">Bernd Schroeder: "Re: Microtek ScanMaker IV on Linux-2.2.10 (Redhat 6.0)"</a>
|
|
<li> <b>Previous message:</b> <a href="0116.html">Oliver Rauch: "Re: Possible xsane bug?"</a>
|
|
<li> <b>In reply to:</b> <a href="0106.html">Irv Thomae: "Re: Microtek E3 won't scan, but II-G okay (SANE-OS/2)"</a>
|
|
<!-- nextthread="start" -->
|
|
<li> <b>Next in thread:</b> <a href="0138.html">Tony Peden: "Re: Microtek E3 won't scan, but II-G okay (SANE-OS/2)"</a>
|
|
<!-- reply="end" -->
|
|
</ul>
|
|
<!-- body="start" -->
|
|
On Sun, 18 Jul 99 16:32:36 -0500, Irv Thomae wrote:<br>
|
|
<p>
|
|
<i>> I'm probably grasping at straws here, but is it conceivable that seemingly </i><br>
|
|
<i>>identical backend code might show different _timing_ characteristics when </i><br>
|
|
<i>>executed under OS/2 (multi-threaded, but lacking fork() ), as opposed to </i><br>
|
|
<i>>running on the same x86 box under Linux? </i><br>
|
|
<p>
|
|
the microtek backend is not using fork(), so it is not multi-threaded<br>
|
|
under OS/2. But it is possible that there are different timing on scsi<br>
|
|
commands, because they have to be routed from 4 different I/O levels.<br>
|
|
<p>
|
|
<p>
|
|
Bye,<br>
|
|
<p>
|
|
Yuri Dario<br>
|
|
<p>
|
|
/*<br>
|
|
* member of TeamOS/2 - Italy<br>
|
|
* <a href="http://www.quasarbbs.com/yuri">http://www.quasarbbs.com/yuri</a><br>
|
|
*/<br>
|
|
<p>
|
|
<p>
|
|
<p>
|
|
<pre>
|
|
--
|
|
Source code, list archive, and docs: <a href="http://www.mostang.com/sane/">http://www.mostang.com/sane/</a>
|
|
To unsubscribe: echo unsubscribe sane-devel | mail <a href="mailto:majordomo@mostang.com">majordomo@mostang.com</a>
|
|
</pre>
|
|
<!-- body="end" -->
|
|
<p>
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<!-- next="start" -->
|
|
<li> <b>Next message:</b> <a href="0118.html">Bernd Schroeder: "Re: Microtek ScanMaker IV on Linux-2.2.10 (Redhat 6.0)"</a>
|
|
<li> <b>Previous message:</b> <a href="0116.html">Oliver Rauch: "Re: Possible xsane bug?"</a>
|
|
<li> <b>In reply to:</b> <a href="0106.html">Irv Thomae: "Re: Microtek E3 won't scan, but II-G okay (SANE-OS/2)"</a>
|
|
<!-- nextthread="start" -->
|
|
<li> <b>Next in thread:</b> <a href="0138.html">Tony Peden: "Re: Microtek E3 won't scan, but II-G okay (SANE-OS/2)"</a>
|
|
<!-- reply="end" -->
|
|
</ul>
|