Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Feature Request: Add support for Brother scanners #171

Closed
hacker-h opened this issue Apr 4, 2021 · 3 comments
Closed

Feature Request: Add support for Brother scanners #171

hacker-h opened this issue Apr 4, 2021 · 3 comments

Comments

@hacker-h
Copy link

hacker-h commented Apr 4, 2021

To support Brother scanners you need an additional proprietary driver.
It can be downloaded and installed like this:

curl https://download.brother.com/welcome/dlf104033/brscan5-1.2.6-0.amd64.deb -o brscan5.deb \
  && apt-get install ./brscan5.deb \
  && rm ./brscan5.deb

With this modification to the Dockerfile it works for me with a brother scanner.

You can also fetch the latest download URL if you want:

curl -s "https://support.brother.com/g/b/downloadhowto.aspx?c=us_ot&lang=en&prod=ads2400n_all&os=128&dlid=dlf104033_000&flang=4&type3=566" | grep '\.deb' | cut -d'=' -f3 | cut -d'"' -f2

Would highly appreciate such a feature upstream, what is your preferred way of dealing with such proprietary drivers?

Note: this will only work for amd64 architectures

@sbs20
Copy link
Owner

sbs20 commented Apr 6, 2021

I'm thinking about how best to achieve this. I'm reluctant to add more to the core image - if anything I'm looking to slim it down. In the mean time it might be possible to create a new image from the base image and install the drivers in there.

@hacker-h
Copy link
Author

hacker-h commented Apr 6, 2021

Agree, I could imagine individual image tags for each custom driver e.g. brother, canon, hp etc.

@sbs20
Copy link
Owner

sbs20 commented Apr 12, 2021

Hi. I've updated the documentation. Having thought about this, I am more certain that I don't want to add further backends to the core image - if anything, I'm even considering removing the sane package so that there are no backends in the image - although I'm still on the fence about it.

In case it's helpful, there is now an improved installation script for non-docker installs which may make your life easier.

@sbs20 sbs20 closed this as completed Apr 12, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants