Red Hat package for Emacspeak 7.0, and new DoubleTalk driver

Red Hat package for Emacspeak 7.0, and new DoubleTalk driver

[James R. Van Zandt]

I have uploaded to the Red Hat site:

   emacspeak-7.0-1.i386.rpm

This rpm supports only the DECtalk and DEC Multivoice.

I have also uploaded a new DoubleTalk driver written in TCL to my web
site http://www.mv.com/ipusers/vanzandt.  Look for this file:

   emacspeak-dt-tcl-0.3.tar.gz

Please try out the driver and let me know if it works for you.  It
supports Emacspeak 7.0, including the pause and resume functions.  If
I get some positive feedback on the driver, I will prepare Red Hat and
Debian packages for it.

(I have been trying to upload the DoubleTalk driver to the blinux ftp
site, but it will not let me create a file.)  

                                 - Jim Van Zandt

Re: Red Hat package for Emacspeak 7.0, and new DoubleTalk driver

[Steve Holmes]

Is RPM all that much better than tar.gz?  I thought RPM was meant
exclusively for updating existing read hat systems.  I have seen on blinux
ftp site some RPM packages with no tar.gz equivelants.  

On Sun, 1 Feb 1998, James R. Van Zandt wrote:

> I have uploaded to the Red Hat site:
> 
>    emacspeak-7.0-1.i386.rpm
> 
> This rpm supports only the DECtalk and DEC Multivoice.
> 
> I have also uploaded a new DoubleTalk driver written in TCL to my web
> site http://www.mv.com/ipusers/vanzandt.  Look for this file:
> 
>    emacspeak-dt-tcl-0.3.tar.gz
> 
> Please try out the driver and let me know if it works for you.  It
> supports Emacspeak 7.0, including the pause and resume functions.  If
> I get some positive feedback on the driver, I will prepare Red Hat and
> Debian packages for it.
> 
> (I have been trying to upload the DoubleTalk driver to the blinux ftp
> site, but it will not let me create a file.)  
> 
>                                  - Jim Van Zandt
> 
> ---
> Send your message for blinux-list to blinux-list@redhat.com
> Blinux software archive at ftp://leb.net/pub/blinux
> Blinux web page at http://leb.net/blinux
> To unsubscribe send mail to blinux-list-request@redhat.com
> with subject line: unsubscribe
> 
> 

Re: Red Hat package for Emacspeak 7.0, and new DoubleTalk driver

[James R. Van Zandt]

Steve Holmes <sholmes@primenet.com> writes:

>Is RPM all that much better than tar.gz?  I thought RPM was meant
>exclusively for updating existing read hat systems.  I have seen on blinux
>ftp site some RPM packages with no tar.gz equivelants.  

With a source package (.tar.gz), you need to unpack, configure,
compile, and install.  You have to read the documentation to find out
what tools you need for compilation and what programs the package
depends on.  To uninstall, you have to inspect the source package and
figure out where all the files went.  Assuming it is well written, the
.tar.gz file can be installed on most any Unix machine.  When a
program is updated, the source package is available first.

A binary package is already compiled, and only needs to be installed
with the package manager.  That's much faster (especially when you are
installing several hundred packages) and more reliable (since the
package manager keeps track of package dependencies).  When you want
to replace a package, the manager knows what files to remove.  

On a Red Hat or Caldera system, the package manager is named "rpm" and
the packages have a ".rpm" extension.  Anyone may create a .rpm file,
and upload it to the "contrib" section of the Red Hat site.

On a Debian system, the package manager is "dpkg", and packages have a
".deb" extension.  Only a "Debian developer" can upload a .deb file to
the Debian home site, and he has to sign each package with his private
key.  This is intended to improve the reliability of the distribution.
Debian also has an open bug reporting system (i.e. not only can any
user submit a bug report, he can also look at all the outstanding bug
reports).  I prefer Debian.

It is possible to install rpm and/or dpkg on pretty much any Unix
system, and use it to install binary packages.  However, you will
probably have to override the dependency checks.  (Cases where package
A depends on package B, which was installed but not by the manager, so
it is not reflected in the manager's database.)

I have made both kinds of binary packages for Emacspeak-7.0 and some
of my own programs, and uploaded them to the respective home sites.
You should be able to find them at any Red Hat or Debian mirror site.
The source code and my patches are available from the same places.

I've also uploaded some of my .rpm and .deb files to the blinux site
and my home page (http://www.mv.com/ipusers/vanzandt), but I think
there are source packages corresponding to each.  Which one could you
not find?

                              - Jim Van Zandt

Re: Red Hat package for Emacspeak 7.0, and new DoubleTalk driver

[L. C. Robinson]

On Sat, 7 Feb 1998, Steve Holmes wrote:

> Is RPM all that much better than tar.gz?

You better believe it.  See www.rpm.org for details.

> I thought RPM was meant exclusively for updating existing red hat
> systems.

No, it is a superior public standard, with a bigger market share
that .tar.gz, now, I believe, and is used by the two biggest Linux
distributors, according to reports, and by a number of smaller ones.

> I have seen on blinux ftp site some RPM packages with no
> tar.gz equivelants.  

Some package maintainers routinely put their stuff in that format.

L. C. Robinson
reply to infynity@cyberhighway.net (a family account)

Re: Red Hat package for Emacspeak 7.0, and new DoubleTalk driver

[Steve Holmes]

I can't remember the specific package now but this was more of a general
question.  I did see a while back a howto on using RPM for slackware based
linuxes.  I started out with a slakware distribution and subsequently
installed several packages on my own after that point - no going back
now:).  This RPM idea sounds interesting particularly when I want to
upgrade a given application but don't want to reinstall slackware and all
that.

Gotta go out and look for the RPM builder now.

Thanks - <Steve>

On Sat, 7 Feb 1998, James R. Van Zandt wrote:

> 
> 
> Steve Holmes <sholmes@primenet.com> writes:
> 
> >Is RPM all that much better than tar.gz?  I thought RPM was meant
> >exclusively for updating existing read hat systems.  I have seen on blinux
> >ftp site some RPM packages with no tar.gz equivelants.  
> 
> With a source package (.tar.gz), you need to unpack, configure,
> compile, and install.  You have to read the documentation to find out
> what tools you need for compilation and what programs the package
> depends on.  To uninstall, you have to inspect the source package and
> figure out where all the files went.  Assuming it is well written, the
> .tar.gz file can be installed on most any Unix machine.  When a
> program is updated, the source package is available first.
> 
> A binary package is already compiled, and only needs to be installed
> with the package manager.  That's much faster (especially when you are
> installing several hundred packages) and more reliable (since the
> package manager keeps track of package dependencies).  When you want
> to replace a package, the manager knows what files to remove.  
> 
> On a Red Hat or Caldera system, the package manager is named "rpm" and
> the packages have a ".rpm" extension.  Anyone may create a .rpm file,
> and upload it to the "contrib" section of the Red Hat site.
> 
> On a Debian system, the package manager is "dpkg", and packages have a
> ".deb" extension.  Only a "Debian developer" can upload a .deb file to
> the Debian home site, and he has to sign each package with his private
> key.  This is intended to improve the reliability of the distribution.
> Debian also has an open bug reporting system (i.e. not only can any
> user submit a bug report, he can also look at all the outstanding bug
> reports).  I prefer Debian.
> 
> It is possible to install rpm and/or dpkg on pretty much any Unix
> system, and use it to install binary packages.  However, you will
> probably have to override the dependency checks.  (Cases where package
> A depends on package B, which was installed but not by the manager, so
> it is not reflected in the manager's database.)
> 
> I have made both kinds of binary packages for Emacspeak-7.0 and some
> of my own programs, and uploaded them to the respective home sites.
> You should be able to find them at any Red Hat or Debian mirror site.
> The source code and my patches are available from the same places.
> 
> I've also uploaded some of my .rpm and .deb files to the blinux site
> and my home page (http://www.mv.com/ipusers/vanzandt), but I think
> there are source packages corresponding to each.  Which one could you
> not find?
> 
>                               - Jim Van Zandt
> 
> ---
> Send your message for blinux-list to blinux-list@redhat.com
> Blinux software archive at ftp://leb.net/pub/blinux
> Blinux web page at http://leb.net/blinux
> To unsubscribe send mail to blinux-list-request@redhat.com
> with subject line: unsubscribe
> 
>