[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#683033: Is There a Patch to Fix This Bug in Testing?



A follow up to my previous post - perhaps this will help others in the same situation.

Take a look at this thread (in particular #8 and only #8, the rest of the info is out of date) for easy steps to update your apt/aptitude system so you can run a mixed system - in my case testing for everything but the hp stuff and experimental for the hp stuff.

After adding experimental to my sources.list using the above recipe and installing the following experimental packages, I can scan again. 
libhpmud0
libsane-hpaio
hplip-data
printer-driver-hpcups
hplip/experimental
printer-driver-hpijs

My debian system only runs testing (up to this point).

I still think this patch should have been added to the testing package because an upgrade to the testing package caused the bug in the first place. One should not have to use experimental packages to recover functionality that has been working for years, but was broken due to an update in a testing package.

Just my 2 cents.

Mark

On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 9:26 AM, Mark Phillips <mark@phillipsoasis.com> wrote:
Hello,

I understand from the bug report that this bug has been fixed in the experimental package for hplip. However, I would like to point out that this bug prevents any scanning with HP OfficeJet Pro L7600 scanners (and others???). Scanning had been working for many years before the release of hplip 3.12.6-3, and now it is broken.

Is there any way to get a patch to fix this bug into testing so all of us who depend on scanning can get back to work? ;) I think waiting for the experimental release to migrate down to testing or stable will take some time.

I have tried downgrading to the previous release, and that enables scanning, but then it prevents other packages from being upgraded and installed and creates an aptitude mess for (at least) my amd64 system, and probably for others. It also seems the ubuntu folks are having similar issues as well. 

Thanks,

Mark Phillips


Reply to: