Since I have an old Brother device whose drivers are installed via brscan2, the proposed change (which adds support for drivers located in /usr/lib/sane) doesn't really apply to me. But I worked around that.
The general preparations according to comment #232 are there, and in addition to that I installed the libusb-0.1-4 package. However, I dropped the ldconfig trick to make .so files in /usr/lib64 shared libraries.
Now to the workaround. I added some symlinks to pretend that the driver files are located in /usr/lib and /usr/lib/sane:
With that setup I first tested scanning with the sane-backends packages in bionic-release. Result (simple-scan):
"No scanners detected"
Then I installed version 1.0.27-1~experimental3ubuntu2.1 of libsane1, libsane-common, and sane-utils from bionic-proposed. After that I could scan using either simple-scan or xsane.
Since I have an old Brother device whose drivers are installed via brscan2, the proposed change (which adds support for drivers located in /usr/lib/sane) doesn't really apply to me. But I worked around that.
The general preparations according to comment #232 are there, and in addition to that I installed the libusb-0.1-4 package. However, I dropped the ldconfig trick to make .so files in /usr/lib64 shared libraries.
Now to the workaround. I added some symlinks to pretend that the driver files are located in /usr/lib and /usr/lib/sane:
$ ls -l /usr/lib/libbr* /usr/lib/sane libbrcolm2. so -> ../lib64/ libbrcolm2. so.1.0. 1 libbrscandec2. so -> ../lib64/ libbrscandec2. so.1.0. 0
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 28 jul 3 21:57 /usr/lib/
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 31 jul 3 21:57 /usr/lib/
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 13 jul 3 21:57 /usr/lib/sane -> ../lib64/sane
With that setup I first tested scanning with the sane-backends packages in bionic-release. Result (simple-scan):
"No scanners detected"
Then I installed version 1.0.27- 1~experimental3 ubuntu2. 1 of libsane1, libsane-common, and sane-utils from bionic-proposed. After that I could scan using either simple-scan or xsane.