Re: [Gnumed-devel] packaging help needed - TWAIN, XSANE, SANE

[Karsten Hilbert]

> Can we please review the GNUmed dependencies for
> 
>       Add documents plugin > Scan page(s)
> 
> to be able to operate a scanner?
> 
> What I am not sure about is whether (in the case of SANE) GNUmed would  
> itself directly access the driver

Not currently (although it can).

>, or whether GNUmed would instead  
> rely on some other software (XSANE?) to talk to the driver,

Yes.

> where the  
> driver (TWAIN e.g. ExactScan / WIA / hybrid e.g. VueSCAN / SANE) will  
> depend on what the scanner would support?

The logic is in pycommon/gmScanBackend.py::acquire_pages_into_files()
and goeth thus:

try to <import and use Twain module>
if that fails
   configured to use xsane ? (currently hardwired to yes)
      -> use xsane
   else <import and use sane module>

This doesn't take into account what platform GNUmed is running on
it simply tries those options in order.

Supposedly, TWAIN access to scanners could be "better" than xsane
(because supplied by the scanner vendor). It would also give access
to "all" scanners since every single one should have a TWAIN driver.

When that fails either the TWAIN module isn't installed or there
is no TWAIN module (IOW, another platform). So we are falling back
to xsane. We don't currently use direct sane access so we don't
currently require PIL.

> On Mac, might options include user's choice of:
> 
>       XSANE / SANE
>                (GNUmed-operable)?
> 
>       or
> 
>       TWAIN SANE Interface for MacOS X / SANE
>                (GNUmed-inoperable)?

both should work

XSane has been serving the needs of at least two users very
well for a few years. I'd say it is very dependable.

Karsten
-- 
Neu: GMX Doppel-FLAT mit Internet-Flatrate + Telefon-Flatrate
für nur 19,99 Euro/mtl.!* http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/dsl02