The FAQ

The FAQ

[Ann Parsons]

Hi all,

First of all, I want to tell you all how much I appreciate all your
help.  You guys are great, and I really appreciate all your comments.  

Now, let me rebut some of this stuff.  From the discussion about the
different distros and the different ways to obtain good results, I
have concluded that the instructions on how to install Speakup do not
belong in the FAQ.  They belong in a full document of their own,
complete with full discussion of the exact commands relating to
synthes and distros and kernel versions.  This is a FAQ.  the answer
to the question about how to install Speakup should be as general as
possible and point to specific info in an additional document.  Note:
Janina, the reason that the install part of the FAQ seems to be skewed
toward Slackware is simply because that was the *only* specific
instructions I received.  Since I'm not a techie, I'm a writer, I work
with what I'm given.  

RE the beginning paragraph, yes, Janina, you are right on all counts,
and I will change it forthwith.  

RE the discussion on cursoring, yes, you're right there too.  I think
I'll just delete it.

RE the discussion of Speakup and Emacspeak, notice I didn't say V.S.,
I liked your comments there too.    I shall incorporate them.

RE the question about which versions of speakup work with which
kernels, I think that I will change 0.10 to 0.10A and say that those
who are using older kernel versions need to consult either the list or
blah, blah, docs which I hope are available.  

RE the bit about Linux and older systems, no, I disagree about leaving
this out.  Reason?  This is an issue close to my heart.  It is
precisely because Linux can run well on a 486, I have one upstairs,
that it is so valuable!  It is not difficult to get Linux to work on a
486, especially if you use a distro that allows you to use the pkgs
you need instead of the pkgs that include X and so on.  Debian and
Slackware are particularly well suited to this type of customized
installation.  If there were a doc about which pkgs were actually
needed in order to run a decent system on a 486, that would be great.
Maybe I'll write one, after this here FAQ.  Do you guys remember when
you had a shell account that only had 20 megs in it?  You can run a
basic system in about 800 megs.  As for mp3's no, you may not have
room for MP3's but you can stream some of them.  If 30 gig hard drives
are down to $99, what are 2.5 ones going for, eh?  

Yes, the comment about if it runs on Windows OK, it will run on Linux
is apt.    I will include it.

I think I've covered the water-front here.  If I haven't, just give me
a nudge and remind me.  I figured it would be easier to write one long
msg rather than try to answer everyone individually.  Again, thanks so
much for all your help.  I'm going to continue to need it if this docs
project is going to continue.  

Ann P.
   


-- 
			Ann K. Parsons  
email:  akp@eznet.net 			ICQ Number:  33006854
WEB SITE:  http://home.eznet.net/~akp
"All that is gold does not glitter.  Not all those who wander are lost."  JRRT

Re: The FAQ

[Gregory Nowak]

Zipslack demonstrates that you can have 
a basic system running on 95 megs.
Greg


On Sun, Jun 17, 2001 at 04:18:04PM -0400, Ann Parsons wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> First of all, I want to tell you all how much I appreciate all your
> help.  You guys are great, and I really appreciate all your comments.  
> 
> Now, let me rebut some of this stuff.  From the discussion about the
> different distros and the different ways to obtain good results, I
> have concluded that the instructions on how to install Speakup do not
> belong in the FAQ.  They belong in a full document of their own,
> complete with full discussion of the exact commands relating to
> synthes and distros and kernel versions.  This is a FAQ.  the answer
> to the question about how to install Speakup should be as general as
> possible and point to specific info in an additional document.  Note:
> Janina, the reason that the install part of the FAQ seems to be skewed
> toward Slackware is simply because that was the *only* specific
> instructions I received.  Since I'm not a techie, I'm a writer, I work
> with what I'm given.  
> 
> RE the beginning paragraph, yes, Janina, you are right on all counts,
> and I will change it forthwith.  
> 
> RE the discussion on cursoring, yes, you're right there too.  I think
> I'll just delete it.
> 
> RE the discussion of Speakup and Emacspeak, notice I didn't say V.S.,
> I liked your comments there too.    I shall incorporate them.
> 
> RE the question about which versions of speakup work with which
> kernels, I think that I will change 0.10 to 0.10A and say that those
> who are using older kernel versions need to consult either the list or
> blah, blah, docs which I hope are available.  
> 
> RE the bit about Linux and older systems, no, I disagree about leaving
> this out.  Reason?  This is an issue close to my heart.  It is
> precisely because Linux can run well on a 486, I have one upstairs,
> that it is so valuable!  It is not difficult to get Linux to work on a
> 486, especially if you use a distro that allows you to use the pkgs
> you need instead of the pkgs that include X and so on.  Debian and
> Slackware are particularly well suited to this type of customized
> installation.  If there were a doc about which pkgs were actually
> needed in order to run a decent system on a 486, that would be great.
> Maybe I'll write one, after this here FAQ.  Do you guys remember when
> you had a shell account that only had 20 megs in it?  You can run a
> basic system in about 800 megs.  As for mp3's no, you may not have
> room for MP3's but you can stream some of them.  If 30 gig hard drives
> are down to $99, what are 2.5 ones going for, eh?  
> 
> Yes, the comment about if it runs on Windows OK, it will run on Linux
> is apt.    I will include it.
> 
> I think I've covered the water-front here.  If I haven't, just give me
> a nudge and remind me.  I figured it would be easier to write one long
> msg rather than try to answer everyone individually.  Again, thanks so
> much for all your help.  I'm going to continue to need it if this docs
> project is going to continue.  
> 
> Ann P.
>    
> 
> 
> -- 
> 			Ann K. Parsons  
> email:  akp@eznet.net 			ICQ Number:  33006854
> WEB SITE:  http://home.eznet.net/~akp
> "All that is gold does not glitter.  Not all those who wander are lost."  JRRT
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: The FAQ

[Janina Sajka]

You're missing my point. The issue is not "can it be done." The issue is
how easy is it using the canned install software of the various distros.
If the various distros will do this in a smart way, as a recent poster
suggests Debian does, then it argues for pushing the minimum system reqs
back. And, as Ann points out, that's very good because it includes more
people with more systems that are sitting around. But, if you have to be a
Matt Campbell to figure out how to put a working distro topgether in 95
megs, that's another story. Functionality is also important--you want to
have things you can do with the minimal system--and that doesn't mean "use
it as a router," not for the audience this FAQ addresses, imho.

 On Sun, 17
Jun 2001, Gregory Nowak wrote:

> Zipslack demonstrates that you can have
> a basic system running on 95 megs.
> Greg
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 17, 2001 at 04:18:04PM -0400, Ann Parsons wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > First of all, I want to tell you all how much I appreciate all your
> > help.  You guys are great, and I really appreciate all your comments.
> >
> > Now, let me rebut some of this stuff.  From the discussion about the
> > different distros and the different ways to obtain good results, I
> > have concluded that the instructions on how to install Speakup do not
> > belong in the FAQ.  They belong in a full document of their own,
> > complete with full discussion of the exact commands relating to
> > synthes and distros and kernel versions.  This is a FAQ.  the answer
> > to the question about how to install Speakup should be as general as
> > possible and point to specific info in an additional document.  Note:
> > Janina, the reason that the install part of the FAQ seems to be skewed
> > toward Slackware is simply because that was the *only* specific
> > instructions I received.  Since I'm not a techie, I'm a writer, I work
> > with what I'm given.
> >
> > RE the beginning paragraph, yes, Janina, you are right on all counts,
> > and I will change it forthwith.
> >
> > RE the discussion on cursoring, yes, you're right there too.  I think
> > I'll just delete it.
> >
> > RE the discussion of Speakup and Emacspeak, notice I didn't say V.S.,
> > I liked your comments there too.    I shall incorporate them.
> >
> > RE the question about which versions of speakup work with which
> > kernels, I think that I will change 0.10 to 0.10A and say that those
> > who are using older kernel versions need to consult either the list or
> > blah, blah, docs which I hope are available.
> >
> > RE the bit about Linux and older systems, no, I disagree about leaving
> > this out.  Reason?  This is an issue close to my heart.  It is
> > precisely because Linux can run well on a 486, I have one upstairs,
> > that it is so valuable!  It is not difficult to get Linux to work on a
> > 486, especially if you use a distro that allows you to use the pkgs
> > you need instead of the pkgs that include X and so on.  Debian and
> > Slackware are particularly well suited to this type of customized
> > installation.  If there were a doc about which pkgs were actually
> > needed in order to run a decent system on a 486, that would be great.
> > Maybe I'll write one, after this here FAQ.  Do you guys remember when
> > you had a shell account that only had 20 megs in it?  You can run a
> > basic system in about 800 megs.  As for mp3's no, you may not have
> > room for MP3's but you can stream some of them.  If 30 gig hard drives
> > are down to $99, what are 2.5 ones going for, eh?
> >
> > Yes, the comment about if it runs on Windows OK, it will run on Linux
> > is apt.    I will include it.
> >
> > I think I've covered the water-front here.  If I haven't, just give me
> > a nudge and remind me.  I figured it would be easier to write one long
> > msg rather than try to answer everyone individually.  Again, thanks so
> > much for all your help.  I'm going to continue to need it if this docs
> > project is going to continue.
> >
> > Ann P.
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > 			Ann K. Parsons
> > email:  akp@eznet.net 			ICQ Number:  33006854
> > WEB SITE:  http://home.eznet.net/~akp
> > "All that is gold does not glitter.  Not all those who wander are lost."  JRRT
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: The FAQ

[Janina Sajka]

Ann:

Just a few quick points from me, then I'm out of here for the day ...

On Sun, 17 Jun 2001, Ann Parsons wrote:

>  From the discussion about the
> different distros and the different ways to obtain good results, I
> have concluded that the instructions on how to install Speakup do not
> belong in the FAQ.  They belong in a full document of their own,
> complete with full discussion of the exact commands relating to
> synthes and distros and kernel versions.

I think this is a wise decision, but you do need to say something. Perhaps
it would be sufficient to say that there are several choices. It might
even be useful to rank them from easiest to most challenging:

a.)	Zipspeak. Hands down easiest, but not a full blown install nor
fully featured;

b.)	Speakup enabled distributions are available. Use these (and not
the ones at the standard distro sites) as found on the speakup (and
octothorp?) site to get speakup in the deal. The fact is that these sites
do include documentation on how to get installation happening.

c.)	Compiling from source. Trickiest for beginners, but worth
learning. Probably the way to go if you've already got linux working on a
computer;

> RE the question about which versions of speakup work with which
> kernels, I think that I will change 0.10 to 0.10A and say that those
> who are using older kernel versions need to consult either the list or
> blah, blah, docs which I hope are available.
Well, they should be available if they aren't. This part isn't rocket
science, though. I really do think handling this correctly is a matter of
a few sentences--but that means looking at the ftp site for what sources
are there currently, and ascertaining which belongs to what kernels. I
frankly don't remember.
 >
> RE the bit about Linux and older systems, no, I disagree about leaving
> this out.  Reason?  This is an issue close to my heart.  It is
> precisely because Linux can run well on a 486, I have one upstairs,
> that it is so valuable!  It is not difficult to get Linux to work on a
> 486, especially if you use a distro that allows you to use the pkgs
> you need instead of the pkgs that include X and so on.  Debian and
> Slackware are particularly well suited to this type of customized
> installation.  If there were a doc about which pkgs were actually
> needed in order to run a decent system on a 486, that would be great.

Well, but that is the issue. I'm not disagreeing with you about including
older systems. I think it's particularly valuable to do that. I just want
a good sense of pointing users at appropriate expectations. If it's easy
to get a good system from the existing distro install routines--then I
withdraw and apologize for wassting bandwidth. I only though to bring this
up because I was faced with a 486 with only a 400 Mb hd the other day, and
had no idea of what I could do in one hour without doing some research and
making a few runs at an install before getting one that would be worth
keeping.
Great work, Ann!

Re: The FAQ

[Gregory Nowak]

The only reason I mentioned the 95 meg
deal was because someone
else posted earlier that
you can get a basic system running with 800 megs of space
which of course isn't true since
zipslack became available.
Greg


On Sun, Jun 17, 2001 at 05:59:41PM -0400, Janina Sajka wrote:
> You're missing my point. The issue is not "can it be done." The issue is
> how easy is it using the canned install software of the various distros.
> If the various distros will do this in a smart way, as a recent poster
> suggests Debian does, then it argues for pushing the minimum system reqs
> back. And, as Ann points out, that's very good because it includes more
> people with more systems that are sitting around. But, if you have to be a
> Matt Campbell to figure out how to put a working distro topgether in 95
> megs, that's another story. Functionality is also important--you want to
> have things you can do with the minimal system--and that doesn't mean "use
> it as a router," not for the audience this FAQ addresses, imho.
> 
>  On Sun, 17
> Jun 2001, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> 
> > Zipslack demonstrates that you can have
> > a basic system running on 95 megs.
> > Greg
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Jun 17, 2001 at 04:18:04PM -0400, Ann Parsons wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > First of all, I want to tell you all how much I appreciate all your
> > > help.  You guys are great, and I really appreciate all your comments.
> > >
> > > Now, let me rebut some of this stuff.  From the discussion about the
> > > different distros and the different ways to obtain good results, I
> > > have concluded that the instructions on how to install Speakup do not
> > > belong in the FAQ.  They belong in a full document of their own,
> > > complete with full discussion of the exact commands relating to
> > > synthes and distros and kernel versions.  This is a FAQ.  the answer
> > > to the question about how to install Speakup should be as general as
> > > possible and point to specific info in an additional document.  Note:
> > > Janina, the reason that the install part of the FAQ seems to be skewed
> > > toward Slackware is simply because that was the *only* specific
> > > instructions I received.  Since I'm not a techie, I'm a writer, I work
> > > with what I'm given.
> > >
> > > RE the beginning paragraph, yes, Janina, you are right on all counts,
> > > and I will change it forthwith.
> > >
> > > RE the discussion on cursoring, yes, you're right there too.  I think
> > > I'll just delete it.
> > >
> > > RE the discussion of Speakup and Emacspeak, notice I didn't say V.S.,
> > > I liked your comments there too.    I shall incorporate them.
> > >
> > > RE the question about which versions of speakup work with which
> > > kernels, I think that I will change 0.10 to 0.10A and say that those
> > > who are using older kernel versions need to consult either the list or
> > > blah, blah, docs which I hope are available.
> > >
> > > RE the bit about Linux and older systems, no, I disagree about leaving
> > > this out.  Reason?  This is an issue close to my heart.  It is
> > > precisely because Linux can run well on a 486, I have one upstairs,
> > > that it is so valuable!  It is not difficult to get Linux to work on a
> > > 486, especially if you use a distro that allows you to use the pkgs
> > > you need instead of the pkgs that include X and so on.  Debian and
> > > Slackware are particularly well suited to this type of customized
> > > installation.  If there were a doc about which pkgs were actually
> > > needed in order to run a decent system on a 486, that would be great.
> > > Maybe I'll write one, after this here FAQ.  Do you guys remember when
> > > you had a shell account that only had 20 megs in it?  You can run a
> > > basic system in about 800 megs.  As for mp3's no, you may not have
> > > room for MP3's but you can stream some of them.  If 30 gig hard drives
> > > are down to $99, what are 2.5 ones going for, eh?
> > >
> > > Yes, the comment about if it runs on Windows OK, it will run on Linux
> > > is apt.    I will include it.
> > >
> > > I think I've covered the water-front here.  If I haven't, just give me
> > > a nudge and remind me.  I figured it would be easier to write one long
> > > msg rather than try to answer everyone individually.  Again, thanks so
> > > much for all your help.  I'm going to continue to need it if this docs
> > > project is going to continue.
> > >
> > > Ann P.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > 			Ann K. Parsons
> > > email:  akp@eznet.net 			ICQ Number:  33006854
> > > WEB SITE:  http://home.eznet.net/~akp
> > > "All that is gold does not glitter.  Not all those who wander are lost."  JRRT
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: The FAQ

[Janina Sajka]

Well, the stats I remember are 386 cpu, 4 Mb RAM, and 40 Mb hd as minimum
linux configuration. I would expect that'd be pretty minimal and not very
functional, though. I wonder how it would be to install and imagine one
would have to be very much up to speed on what had to be there and what
could go.
 On Sun, 17 Jun 2001, Gregory Nowak wrote:

> The only reason I mentioned the 95 meg
> deal was because someone
> else posted earlier that
> you can get a basic system running with 800 megs of space
> which of course isn't true since
> zipslack became available.
> Greg
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 17, 2001 at 05:59:41PM -0400, Janina Sajka wrote:
> > You're missing my point. The issue is not "can it be done." The issue is
> > how easy is it using the canned install software of the various distros.
> > If the various distros will do this in a smart way, as a recent poster
> > suggests Debian does, then it argues for pushing the minimum system reqs
> > back. And, as Ann points out, that's very good because it includes more
> > people with more systems that are sitting around. But, if you have to be a
> > Matt Campbell to figure out how to put a working distro topgether in 95
> > megs, that's another story. Functionality is also important--you want to
> > have things you can do with the minimal system--and that doesn't mean "use
> > it as a router," not for the audience this FAQ addresses, imho.
> >
> >  On Sun, 17
> > Jun 2001, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> >
> > > Zipslack demonstrates that you can have
> > > a basic system running on 95 megs.
> > > Greg
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sun, Jun 17, 2001 at 04:18:04PM -0400, Ann Parsons wrote:
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > First of all, I want to tell you all how much I appreciate all your
> > > > help.  You guys are great, and I really appreciate all your comments.
> > > >
> > > > Now, let me rebut some of this stuff.  From the discussion about the
> > > > different distros and the different ways to obtain good results, I
> > > > have concluded that the instructions on how to install Speakup do not
> > > > belong in the FAQ.  They belong in a full document of their own,
> > > > complete with full discussion of the exact commands relating to
> > > > synthes and distros and kernel versions.  This is a FAQ.  the answer
> > > > to the question about how to install Speakup should be as general as
> > > > possible and point to specific info in an additional document.  Note:
> > > > Janina, the reason that the install part of the FAQ seems to be skewed
> > > > toward Slackware is simply because that was the *only* specific
> > > > instructions I received.  Since I'm not a techie, I'm a writer, I work
> > > > with what I'm given.
> > > >
> > > > RE the beginning paragraph, yes, Janina, you are right on all counts,
> > > > and I will change it forthwith.
> > > >
> > > > RE the discussion on cursoring, yes, you're right there too.  I think
> > > > I'll just delete it.
> > > >
> > > > RE the discussion of Speakup and Emacspeak, notice I didn't say V.S.,
> > > > I liked your comments there too.    I shall incorporate them.
> > > >
> > > > RE the question about which versions of speakup work with which
> > > > kernels, I think that I will change 0.10 to 0.10A and say that those
> > > > who are using older kernel versions need to consult either the list or
> > > > blah, blah, docs which I hope are available.
> > > >
> > > > RE the bit about Linux and older systems, no, I disagree about leaving
> > > > this out.  Reason?  This is an issue close to my heart.  It is
> > > > precisely because Linux can run well on a 486, I have one upstairs,
> > > > that it is so valuable!  It is not difficult to get Linux to work on a
> > > > 486, especially if you use a distro that allows you to use the pkgs
> > > > you need instead of the pkgs that include X and so on.  Debian and
> > > > Slackware are particularly well suited to this type of customized
> > > > installation.  If there were a doc about which pkgs were actually
> > > > needed in order to run a decent system on a 486, that would be great.
> > > > Maybe I'll write one, after this here FAQ.  Do you guys remember when
> > > > you had a shell account that only had 20 megs in it?  You can run a
> > > > basic system in about 800 megs.  As for mp3's no, you may not have
> > > > room for MP3's but you can stream some of them.  If 30 gig hard drives
> > > > are down to $99, what are 2.5 ones going for, eh?
> > > >
> > > > Yes, the comment about if it runs on Windows OK, it will run on Linux
> > > > is apt.    I will include it.
> > > >
> > > > I think I've covered the water-front here.  If I haven't, just give me
> > > > a nudge and remind me.  I figured it would be easier to write one long
> > > > msg rather than try to answer everyone individually.  Again, thanks so
> > > > much for all your help.  I'm going to continue to need it if this docs
> > > > project is going to continue.
> > > >
> > > > Ann P.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > 			Ann K. Parsons
> > > > email:  akp@eznet.net 			ICQ Number:  33006854
> > > > WEB SITE:  http://home.eznet.net/~akp
> > > > "All that is gold does not glitter.  Not all those who wander are lost."  JRRT
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: The FAQ

[Victor Tsaran]

Very good point, Janina! But this should be pointed out in the FAQ. Users
should feel the advantages!
Best,
Victor

----- Original Message -----
From: "Janina Sajka" <janina@afb.net>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Sunday, June 17, 2001 11:59 PM
Subject: Re: The FAQ


> You're missing my point. The issue is not "can it be done." The issue is
> how easy is it using the canned install software of the various distros.
> If the various distros will do this in a smart way, as a recent poster
> suggests Debian does, then it argues for pushing the minimum system reqs
> back. And, as Ann points out, that's very good because it includes more
> people with more systems that are sitting around. But, if you have to be a
> Matt Campbell to figure out how to put a working distro topgether in 95
> megs, that's another story. Functionality is also important--you want to
> have things you can do with the minimal system--and that doesn't mean "use
> it as a router," not for the audience this FAQ addresses, imho.
>
>  On Sun, 17
> Jun 2001, Gregory Nowak wrote:
>
> > Zipslack demonstrates that you can have
> > a basic system running on 95 megs.
> > Greg
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Jun 17, 2001 at 04:18:04PM -0400, Ann Parsons wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > First of all, I want to tell you all how much I appreciate all your
> > > help.  You guys are great, and I really appreciate all your comments.
> > >
> > > Now, let me rebut some of this stuff.  From the discussion about the
> > > different distros and the different ways to obtain good results, I
> > > have concluded that the instructions on how to install Speakup do not
> > > belong in the FAQ.  They belong in a full document of their own,
> > > complete with full discussion of the exact commands relating to
> > > synthes and distros and kernel versions.  This is a FAQ.  the answer
> > > to the question about how to install Speakup should be as general as
> > > possible and point to specific info in an additional document.  Note:
> > > Janina, the reason that the install part of the FAQ seems to be skewed
> > > toward Slackware is simply because that was the *only* specific
> > > instructions I received.  Since I'm not a techie, I'm a writer, I work
> > > with what I'm given.
> > >
> > > RE the beginning paragraph, yes, Janina, you are right on all counts,
> > > and I will change it forthwith.
> > >
> > > RE the discussion on cursoring, yes, you're right there too.  I think
> > > I'll just delete it.
> > >
> > > RE the discussion of Speakup and Emacspeak, notice I didn't say V.S.,
> > > I liked your comments there too.    I shall incorporate them.
> > >
> > > RE the question about which versions of speakup work with which
> > > kernels, I think that I will change 0.10 to 0.10A and say that those
> > > who are using older kernel versions need to consult either the list or
> > > blah, blah, docs which I hope are available.
> > >
> > > RE the bit about Linux and older systems, no, I disagree about leaving
> > > this out.  Reason?  This is an issue close to my heart.  It is
> > > precisely because Linux can run well on a 486, I have one upstairs,
> > > that it is so valuable!  It is not difficult to get Linux to work on a
> > > 486, especially if you use a distro that allows you to use the pkgs
> > > you need instead of the pkgs that include X and so on.  Debian and
> > > Slackware are particularly well suited to this type of customized
> > > installation.  If there were a doc about which pkgs were actually
> > > needed in order to run a decent system on a 486, that would be great.
> > > Maybe I'll write one, after this here FAQ.  Do you guys remember when
> > > you had a shell account that only had 20 megs in it?  You can run a
> > > basic system in about 800 megs.  As for mp3's no, you may not have
> > > room for MP3's but you can stream some of them.  If 30 gig hard drives
> > > are down to $99, what are 2.5 ones going for, eh?
> > >
> > > Yes, the comment about if it runs on Windows OK, it will run on Linux
> > > is apt.    I will include it.
> > >
> > > I think I've covered the water-front here.  If I haven't, just give me
> > > a nudge and remind me.  I figured it would be easier to write one long
> > > msg rather than try to answer everyone individually.  Again, thanks so
> > > much for all your help.  I'm going to continue to need it if this docs
> > > project is going to continue.
> > >
> > > Ann P.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Ann K. Parsons
> > > email:  akp@eznet.net ICQ Number:  33006854
> > > WEB SITE:  http://home.eznet.net/~akp
> > > "All that is gold does not glitter.  Not all those who wander are
lost."  JRRT
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>