Re: [hpoj-devel] Is ANYBODY there? (was: i/o error)

[James B. H. <jh...@vi...>]

Hi!

> Thanks for replying.

You bet.  (I'll get off this thread with this email, since it's way
OT now.  My apologies in advance).

> I wouldn't normally use up this much bandwidth, but actually your
> intuition seems to be incorrect in this case:

Ok, will certainly buy that for now (until <whine> I have time to
look at what you've posted for details <unwhine>).

> > a.  Historically, printing (anything, on anything) is one of the hardest
> > things for most people to set up correctly under linux.
> 
> My issue is with the ADF, not printing.

Ok.  I probably got my wires crossed between you and Roberto, who has
the 1210 that he can't get to print.  By the time I was reading this, and
seeing the "it's useless" gist, I was forgetting that your issue was
ADF, and that his was "doesn't work".  My bad.  I should know better
than to comment without careful review.

> (Even though the black ink ran out when an undocumented feature of
> ptal-pml says that the black level is 50%, that is.)

IIRC, there was some discussion on-list between Sep-Nov 03, one or
two posts maybe, about the then-status and developer's intent for
this particular family of features.  Bottom line was, intent was
there, but lower on the priority list and didn't get done before
the realignment of David-off, Cory-on.

> CUPS was easy to set up.  Surprisingly pleasant, actually.

Can't deal with it.  Glad it's good for you :-)

> My issue, which again is about the ADF, is documented in
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=272304 and
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=283018 .

Ok, tomorrow will have the look I should have taken before firing
my yap.

> > c.  I have had a 7130 since March.  Every function on it that hpoj IS
> > intended to support works just fine (and those functionalities that
> 
> Glad it works for you.  My 6110 does not work for me.  We can trade,
> if you want.  :-)

's'ok.  The only badness I have so far, and it clearly is a hard/firmware
issue, is that the fax auto-answer gets easily confused over incoming voice
vs. fax call, and triggers on many voice calls, especially when there is
a cordless or cell on the other end; even more odd is that it will do so
even when the minimum ring count threshold hasn't yet been met.

> > f.  Believe you'd said that your 6110 once was working, and then
> > wasn't; and that you'd gone through about 3 Debian versions since
> > then.
> 
> Correct about the stopped working.  Incorrect about the versions.  I
> don't know where you got the number 3 from.  After a few weeks (I will
> have to look at the receipt and my notes and logs), the scanner
> stopped working.  I did not change any Debian versions.  I stayed with
> Sarge for the entire time.  I did not change kernels.  I did not
> reinstall.  I did not add hardware.

Again, my imprecision.  Should have said "releases" vice "versions".
But something happened, probably not bitrot in hpoj...

> What I DID do is normal apt-get upgrade of Sarge packages, in which,
> if there is a new version of hpoj or libusb* or sane or anything else
> relevant, something might possibly have changed.  Note: *possibly*; we
> don't know the cause of the problem yet, because nobody has been able
> to look at all of the debugging output yet.

Wouldn't likely have been different hpoj, as there hasn't been one in
a year.  Could have been different something else.  I'm putting my $2
bet on that.

> > As above, I'm sorry (truly) that I just haven't had the time to help
> > you set up your configuration.  But I'm certain that that's where
> > the issue lies.  [...]
> 
> What in the debugging output makes you certain of this?  I'm not

Nothing yet - that's what I meant about not yet having put the time into
looking in detail.  But I'm challenged by it, so I will.  Not that I'll
find anything, but... maybe.

> saying you're wrong -- might be some SMP thing I have to do that was
> too obscure to figure out from the documentation (I know about the
> printer.c thing) and not handled properly by Debian's scripts -- but
> I'm wondering what error message or scanner behavior led you to be
> certain?  That way I can try tweaking whatever you think is relevant. 
> (Assuming you have time to explain your reasoning, it would be
> helpful.)

The reasoning so far was as in a. through e. points previously, nothing
detailed based on data.  Now that you've pointed out my confusion of
your statements, I'll hang it purely on my visceral, euphemistic observations
about distributions.

> > just work, one will surely be disappointed.  (This is a big reason
> > why I never mess with distributions - just get stuff, understand what
> > it does, build it myself, set it the way I want it, and go).
> 
> Never mess with distributions?  You mean you get the kernel and
> utilities and applications all separately and create your own
> filesystem structure?  WOW!  You're way more macho than me.  :-) 

That is exactly what I do.  I borrow some basics from Slackware, which I
believe is the purest of distributions.  Basics meaning, some infrastructure
items I just don't feel like building (gcc, g++, libc, some necessary but
boring utilities, like groff), and the basic filesystem structure, plus
the rc.X contents... and then I get everything else and build from
scratch.  The most painful one is gnome, but it's not bad.

> Again, WOW!  May I say it again?  WOW!  :-)

Not needed.  It's a great way to stay up on things.

> Me, I'm a serious wimp.  I just get Debian and run apt-get, and answer
> the configuration questions it asks me, and if something doesn't work
> then poke around as best as possible in the documentation or scripts. 
> But I got as far as I could with this one and can't go any farther
> without somebody more knowledgable (again WOW!  :-)) than myself
> reading the debugging output and helping me figure out what the
> problem is.  Granted, I should know more, and I am trying to, but I
> got as far as I could.

Roger that.  Just asking that you recognize the possibility/probability
that, without opening the hood, it's hard to declare with any certainty
which hose is leaking.

> FWIW the Debian hpoj maintainer says that it seems to be an hpoj
> problem rather than a Debian problem or a hardware problem.  And the
> Debian Sane maintainer says that it's an hpoj problem rather than a
> Sane problem.  For all I know, it's sunspots corrupting the USB cable.

Two items there.  First, the classic "it's not mine" response.  Almost
never have I found that to be correct, even after a thumbnail assessment.
The other - my own experience has shown basic linux USB behavior to be
pretty flaky, at least using my particular mobo (Tyan S2460, also SMP).
Nothing directly clear to me, but also nothing to do with any particular
application or library - it's either driver or driver/hardware combination.
I can give you more anecdotes on that off-list if you like.

> (Hmm, maybe you mean you mean that you do cd /usr/local/...; tar -xvf;
> ./Configure.  IMHO that's what apt-get does, except that it does it
> for me and it puts things in the right places so I don't have to
> figure out where the right places are.  I could try to do that all
> myself, but I doubt that I would do a better job than the Debian
> maintainer who has been following the technical issues and knows what
> "usbdevfs", "usbfs", "devfs", or "udev" might or might not have to do
> with the devices.)

Kinda like that, except it's ./configure, as in configure-then-compile/install.
Do that for everything, with minor exceptions.  Lets me study stuff, and
set up my whole box exactly the way I want it.

> > NOTE:  I just put XP on my wife's machine, and I can't get a serial mouse
> > to work.  How lame is that?
> 
> What, you singlehandedly maintain your own distribution and you can't
> get a mouse to work?  :-)  Well, I know what you mean.  I find Linux
> easier also.

Trust me - it's nothing I'm doing or failing to do :-)  I have no ability
to caress any of it.  Install just doesn't pick it up, and there's nothing
I can do to force it.  Had the same trouble with Win2k a year ago.  Then
one day, it magically picked it up.  Sunspots, yes.

> > Also, like I said earlier - I don't think your original post ever made it
> > to the list (and you said as much in later email to me off-list), so you got
> > a long lag in getting an answer, since no one saw it back then.
> 
> Hmm, I don't recall saying that in email off-list.  On-list, I recall

Not directly.  It was brief references.  Again, searching on 6110 in the
archive turns up nothing until your Hail Mary post.

> saying that I posted via gmane then and got various indications that
> it did post, including the actual post to gmane, believe it or not. 
> Don't know why it would post to gmane but not the list.

No clue either.  Suggest you search the archive on the date you sent it,
and see if it's there.  I think it isn't, and I don't recall seeing via
email with your name until the Hail Mary either.

> And please sometime share your distribution with us wimps.  Maybe it
> will be better than Debian.  :-)

Will describe off-list, if you like.

jbh