Re: what binds to port
On Fri 30 Jul 2021 at 17:47:50 +0100, mick crane wrote:
> On 2021-07-30 15:36, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 30, 2021 at 03:21:47PM +0100, mick crane wrote:
> > > >>> > Can I assume there is something else binding to the scanner address ?
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > >>it's inetd
> > > >>tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:sane-port 0.0.0.0:*
> > > >>LISTEN
> > > >>869/inetd
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > The only thing not commented out is
> > > sane-port stream tcp nowait saned /usr/sbin/scanbm scanbm
> > >
> > > The scanbd installer package must have put it there.
> > > I'm thinking inetd is the thing that is watching and tells scanbm to
> > > wake up.
> >
> > Exactly: that's inetd's job (well, it used to be, until
> > systemd "reinvented" it).
> >
> > Cheers
> > - t
>
> This is getting silly. Why have I got 2 scanners
You do not have two scanners. You have a single scanner capable of
using two different SANE backends, fujitsu: and escl:. Actually, you
are using a third backend, net:, too.
> mick@pumpkin:~$ scanimage -L
> device `net:localhost:fujitsu:fi-5750Cdj:107245' is a FUJITSU fi-5750Cdj
> scanner
> device `net:localhost:escl:fi-5750Cdj:107245' is a FUJITSU fi-5750Cdj
> scanner
> mick@pumpkin:~$
> what is this "escl" one?
Your are using bullseye. It comes with the territory.
https://wiki.debian.org/SaneOverNetwork#escl
I might have missed it, but did you ever say in this thread what the
device is?
> How hard is it to get rid of this systemd and helper things stuff ?
Rhetorical, I hope? You haven't any evidence to believe it is the
source of any of your difficulties. User disparagement doesn't count.
> I like things to work but I'm quite capable of breaking things on my own.
A sound principal for anyone to take note of.
--
Brian.
Reply to: