Comment by jdub
13 hours ago
Hrm, yes-we-scan and printervention are built on SANE and CUPS respectively, which makes sense. But running them in a whole wasm-emulated Linux kernel and userland seems... like a lot.
13 hours ago
Hrm, yes-we-scan and printervention are built on SANE and CUPS respectively, which makes sense. But running them in a whole wasm-emulated Linux kernel and userland seems... like a lot.
Oh, and:
> I must apologise that I haven’t so far open-sourced any part of this that I don’t have to.
With some blather about commercial opportunities. Which is a weird thing to say without linking to the bits that must be shared (under the terms of the various licenses).
There’s separately a /credits page where I’ve done that, linked from the footer. Perhaps I should link it from the apology too. Tell me if you think I’ve not shared what I have to.
If you just need a single scan every now and then and have an old scanner, I can see this being handy. Installing Linux, battling Windows drivers or buying Vuescan (great as it is) might be enough to make most just give up and take a photo of whatever document they where going to scan.
It is a little much, but if it can be made to "Just Work" by booting a Linux kernel in the browser that it pretty cool and impressive. I'm still a little on the fence about my browser having USB support, but this could be handy for dusins of people.
Ah, it seems like the architecture was designed by a slop machine. OK.
RE'ing drivers and porting them is one of those things that AI turns out to be really useful for, and there have been a few of such projects posted here already. But of course the author has to drive it in that direction rather than let it just glue stuff together.
If they reverse engineered the drivers then why do they need a virtual cpu and a Linux kernel to run them. Is this reverse engineering or just installing software in a weird environment?
Speaking of not just gluing stuff together with usb/ip could one make a virtual WebUSB host kernel module that could be used by the Linux kernel USB stack? They most likely would not want to do that because then all of the code would be GPL and would have to be shared with the public.
1 reply →