New user encountering problems

New user encountering problems

[Jerry Robinette]

Hi;

I apologize for the length of this. I'm trying to help a blind buddy of mine get access to Linux and we were very excited about the possibilities of Speakup. Unfortunately, our first attempts have crashed and burned, and I didn't see anything relevant in the documentation or the archive, so I thought I'd try the list.

The system is a Pentium 120, running RedHat 6.2, kernal 2.2.14. They synthesizer involved is a DECTalk Express. This hardware all works without problem under a variety of Windows OSs (this is on a test system at our office). I have successfully compiled and installed custom kernels before, but it has been many months, so I am open to "user error" as the cause.

When we downloaded the speakup-patch tar.gz, the patch applied without problem (except for prompting about system architectures like PPC, MIPS, etc.). The Speakup option did not appear in a "make xconfig" but it did in "make config" and the compilation seemed OK (no errors, etc.)

We copied the new kernel & system.map into the /boot directory and adjusted the links exactly as described in the INSTALLATION document. When we boot, we get "LILO" then on the next line "loading Linux ...." and then it just stalls. No sound, no boot, no nothing!

Out of curiousity, we made a RedHat 6.2 bootdisk out of the appropriate image file, and it boots just fine, but we get no sound at all from the synth.

So the questions are:

Does the first issue sound like a kernel problem, or a LILO issue? Is there a really clear and complete set of instructions on changing LILO to use a new kernel? (LILO took my lilo.conf OK, and responded "added Linux" but that may not mean anything, I guess.)

Does it matter which serial port the DECTalk Express is on? We tried it on both one and two, with the same results. Does Speakup probe for the right port?

I believe the serial port defaults to 38400 bps, and I understand the DECTalk can only handle 9600. Do I need to put "serial=9600n8" in the global section of the lilo.con for this to work at all? Or does this matter?

We're both excited by the potential, and I can guarantee you that when John gets up and running he will be sending you all manner of DECTalk info, requests, kudos, etc.

Thanks for any help you can provide!

Jerry


 

Re: New user encountering problems

[Gorgotek Systems]

Hi I havent much experience with speakup or the DECTalk hardware but I
do run RH 6.2. After you copied the new kernel & system.map into the
/boot directory and adjusted the links, did you modify /etc/lilo.conf to
reflect these changes? If not, back up the file and modify it to reflect
your new kernel and rerun lilo from the /etc directory.

Greg Keto

Jerry Robinette wrote:
> 
> Hi;
> 
> I apologize for the length of this. I'm trying to help a blind buddy of mine get access to Linux and we were very excited about the possibilities of Speakup. Unfortunately, our first attempts have crashed and burned, and I didn't see anything relevant in the documentation or the archive, so I thought I'd try the list.
> 
> The system is a Pentium 120, running RedHat 6.2, kernal 2.2.14. They synthesizer involved is a DECTalk Express. This hardware all works without problem under a variety of Windows OSs (this is on a test system at our office). I have successfully compiled and installed custom kernels before, but it has been many months, so I am open to "user error" as the cause.
> 
> When we downloaded the speakup-patch tar.gz, the patch applied without problem (except for prompting about system architectures like PPC, MIPS, etc.). The Speakup option did not appear in a "make xconfig" but it did in "make config" and the compilation seemed OK (no errors, etc.)
> 
> We copied the new kernel & system.map into the /boot directory and adjusted the links exactly as described in the INSTALLATION document. When we boot, we get "LILO" then on the next line "loading Linux ...." and then it just stalls. No sound, no boot, no nothing!
> 
> Out of curiousity, we made a RedHat 6.2 bootdisk out of the appropriate image file, and it boots just fine, but we get no sound at all from the synth.
> 
> So the questions are:
> 
> Does the first issue sound like a kernel problem, or a LILO issue? Is there a really clear and complete set of instructions on changing LILO to use a new kernel? (LILO took my lilo.conf OK, and responded "added Linux" but that may not mean anything, I guess.)
> 
> Does it matter which serial port the DECTalk Express is on? We tried it on both one and two, with the same results. Does Speakup probe for the right port?
> 
> I believe the serial port defaults to 38400 bps, and I understand the DECTalk can only handle 9600. Do I need to put "serial=9600n8" in the global section of the lilo.con for this to work at all? Or does this matter?
> 
> We're both excited by the potential, and I can guarantee you that when John gets up and running he will be sending you all manner of DECTalk info, requests, kudos, etc.
> 
> Thanks for any help you can provide!
> 
> Jerry
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: New user encountering problems

[Kirk Wood]

> Does the first issue sound like a kernel problem, or a LILO issue? 

I believe this is a kernel problem. Once the kernel starts expanding (you
get the loading and the dots, then the kernel quickly takes over. My guess
is that you used the kernell source provided by RedHat. If you did, then
you should download the kernel (possibly from kernel.org) and apply the
patch compile, etc.) RedHat doesn't provide the complete kernel and as a
result the built images don't work correct. Sorry I can't give you more
complete details. Just that it is common to discover you can't build a
working kernel with speakup from the RedHat source package.

> Does it matter which serial port the DECTalk Express is on? 
Again, I could be wrong, but it should probe for the synth. There is a way
to specify the port and the speed, but I can't help you on that. I believe
most the time you should be able to just set it up and run. Incedently you
can boot with no synth present. So if you think there may be a problem
just turn off the synth. A good setup will boot, then you can add the
synth.

-- 
Kirk Wood
Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
------------------

Seek simplicity -- and distrust it.
		Alfred North Whitehead

Re: New user encountering problems

[Jacob Schmude]

Hi
	It is possible to build a speakup kernel from the Red Hat source
RPM. Just skip the patches that can't find their files, they don't apply
to the i386.
	However, the kernel will build, but unless you use a rh supplied
config, your modules will have unresolved symbols all over the place. I
don't think speakup agrees with some of the patches RH applied to their
kernel rpm, for it is not a clean source. They've applied all sorts of
stuff that are beta, or even alpha. Not wise, I believe they do it to try
to get their distro to support more hardware.
	Personally, I think slackware is the best, closely followed by
debian.

On Fri, 22 Sep 2000, Kirk Wood wrote:

> I believe this is a kernel problem. Once the kernel starts expanding (you
> get the loading and the dots, then the kernel quickly takes over. My guess
> is that you used the kernell source provided by RedHat. If you did, then
> you should download the kernel (possibly from kernel.org) and apply the
> patch compile, etc.) RedHat doesn't provide the complete kernel and as a
> result the built images don't work correct. Sorry I can't give you more
> complete details. Just that it is common to discover you can't build a
> working kernel with speakup from the RedHat source package.
> 

Re: New user encountering problems

[Brent Harding]

I've liked debian for awhile, but tons of stuff won't compile, because the
locations of files are a little screwy. Why put stuff in non standard
places I don't know. How does one configure a redhat kernel when compiling
anyways? I'm thinking about using it some time, suppose I need the 3c59x
driver support for networking, can I config it like a normal kernel or does
redhat have tools to make this easier?
At 11:24 PM 9/22/00 -0400, you wrote:
>Hi
>	It is possible to build a speakup kernel from the Red Hat source
>RPM. Just skip the patches that can't find their files, they don't apply
>to the i386.
>	However, the kernel will build, but unless you use a rh supplied
>config, your modules will have unresolved symbols all over the place. I
>don't think speakup agrees with some of the patches RH applied to their
>kernel rpm, for it is not a clean source. They've applied all sorts of
>stuff that are beta, or even alpha. Not wise, I believe they do it to try
>to get their distro to support more hardware.
>	Personally, I think slackware is the best, closely followed by
>debian.
>
>On Fri, 22 Sep 2000, Kirk Wood wrote:
>
>> I believe this is a kernel problem. Once the kernel starts expanding (you
>> get the loading and the dots, then the kernel quickly takes over. My guess
>> is that you used the kernell source provided by RedHat. If you did, then
>> you should download the kernel (possibly from kernel.org) and apply the
>> patch compile, etc.) RedHat doesn't provide the complete kernel and as a
>> result the built images don't work correct. Sorry I can't give you more
>> complete details. Just that it is common to discover you can't build a
>> working kernel with speakup from the RedHat source package.
>> 
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Speakup mailing list
>Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
>
>

Re: New user encountering problems

[Geoff Shang]

On Fri, 22 Sep 2000, Brent Harding wrote:

> I've liked debian for awhile, but tons of stuff won't compile, because the
> locations of files are a little screwy.

Personally, I've found debian's file locations to be very standardised, and
I've never had much trouble compiling anything much (well certainly nothing
that was distribution-related).  What problems have you struck?

Geoff.

Re: New user encountering problems

[Brent Harding]

Oh, some program I was trying to compile that had an error in comm.c,
something with getpeername and other stuff like that, it appears as there's
more than one thing and it doesn't know which to use, and I'm not much in
to coding, so these error functions really don't mean much. Also, certain
things expect different locations for stuff, and it takes a lot of coding
to change it, as debian wants stuff in different places than most
distributions.
At 05:08 PM 9/23/00 +1100, you wrote:
>On Fri, 22 Sep 2000, Brent Harding wrote:
>
>> I've liked debian for awhile, but tons of stuff won't compile, because the
>> locations of files are a little screwy.
>
>Personally, I've found debian's file locations to be very standardised, and
>I've never had much trouble compiling anything much (well certainly nothing
>that was distribution-related).  What problems have you struck?
>
>Geoff.
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Speakup mailing list
>Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
>
>

Re: New user encountering problems

[Jacob Schmude]

Hi
	Well, I don't know what tools debian provides, but I know redhat
does have a tool to configure networking. Be warned, though, any use of
rh's tools, then try to build your own kernel, and you're likely screwed
up. They seem to take a stand like "Oh, you don't need to build a kernel,
do it our way".
	You're certainly right about debian having files in nonstandard
places. Whoever heard  of dosemu's configuration files going in
/usr/lib/dosemu/etc, for example.

On Fri, 22 Sep 2000, Brent Harding wrote:

> I've liked debian for awhile, but tons of stuff won't compile, because the
> locations of files are a little screwy. Why put stuff in non standard
> places I don't know. How does one configure a redhat kernel when compiling
> anyways? I'm thinking about using it some time, suppose I need the 3c59x
> driver support for networking, can I config it like a normal kernel or does
> redhat have tools to make this easier?
> At 11:24 PM 9/22/00 -0400, you wrote:
> >Hi
> >	It is possible to build a speakup kernel from the Red Hat source
> >RPM. Just skip the patches that can't find their files, they don't apply
> >to the i386.
> >	However, the kernel will build, but unless you use a rh supplied
> >config, your modules will have unresolved symbols all over the place. I
> >don't think speakup agrees with some of the patches RH applied to their
> >kernel rpm, for it is not a clean source. They've applied all sorts of
> >stuff that are beta, or even alpha. Not wise, I believe they do it to try
> >to get their distro to support more hardware.
> >	Personally, I think slackware is the best, closely followed by
> >debian.
> >
> >On Fri, 22 Sep 2000, Kirk Wood wrote:
> >
> >> I believe this is a kernel problem. Once the kernel starts expanding (you
> >> get the loading and the dots, then the kernel quickly takes over. My guess
> >> is that you used the kernell source provided by RedHat. If you did, then
> >> you should download the kernel (possibly from kernel.org) and apply the
> >> patch compile, etc.) RedHat doesn't provide the complete kernel and as a
> >> result the built images don't work correct. Sorry I can't give you more
> >> complete details. Just that it is common to discover you can't build a
> >> working kernel with speakup from the RedHat source package.
> >> 
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >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: New user encountering problems

[Kirk Wood]

I don't know why you might have had the troubles you mentioned Jacob. I
have two rethat systems myself and have never had any trouble with custom
kernels. I don't use make install to place them either.

After doing a make BzImage, I copy the new kernel to my /boot dir and
update lilo.conf manually. Personally I don't use the "standard" nameing
scheme. Partly because this only works if you have one kernel. I have
played arround and when doing stuff may try fiv or six different kernels
all with slightly different options in them. Instead, I use a date scheme.

My experiance has been that the kernel can be named anything. It can sit
anyplce on the disk that can be reached using the bios access to the disk.

-- 
Kirk Wood
Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
------------------

Seek simplicity -- and distrust it.
		Alfred North Whitehead

Re: New user encountering problems

[Brent Harding]

I am not real fond of that. Can speakup still be patched in to redhat's
kernel? What devices are configured in to it's default config file, or
whatever it does to do it for you when you install a kernel rpm?
At 01:31 PM 9/23/00 -0400, you wrote:
>Hi
>	Well, I don't know what tools debian provides, but I know redhat
>does have a tool to configure networking. Be warned, though, any use of
>rh's tools, then try to build your own kernel, and you're likely screwed
>up. They seem to take a stand like "Oh, you don't need to build a kernel,
>do it our way".
>	You're certainly right about debian having files in nonstandard
>places. Whoever heard  of dosemu's configuration files going in
>/usr/lib/dosemu/etc, for example.
>
>On Fri, 22 Sep 2000, Brent Harding wrote:
>
>> I've liked debian for awhile, but tons of stuff won't compile, because the
>> locations of files are a little screwy. Why put stuff in non standard
>> places I don't know. How does one configure a redhat kernel when compiling
>> anyways? I'm thinking about using it some time, suppose I need the 3c59x
>> driver support for networking, can I config it like a normal kernel or does
>> redhat have tools to make this easier?
>> At 11:24 PM 9/22/00 -0400, you wrote:
>> >Hi
>> >	It is possible to build a speakup kernel from the Red Hat source
>> >RPM. Just skip the patches that can't find their files, they don't apply
>> >to the i386.
>> >	However, the kernel will build, but unless you use a rh supplied
>> >config, your modules will have unresolved symbols all over the place. I
>> >don't think speakup agrees with some of the patches RH applied to their
>> >kernel rpm, for it is not a clean source. They've applied all sorts of
>> >stuff that are beta, or even alpha. Not wise, I believe they do it to try
>> >to get their distro to support more hardware.
>> >	Personally, I think slackware is the best, closely followed by
>> >debian.
>> >
>> >On Fri, 22 Sep 2000, Kirk Wood wrote:
>> >
>> >> I believe this is a kernel problem. Once the kernel starts expanding
(you
>> >> get the loading and the dots, then the kernel quickly takes over. My
guess
>> >> is that you used the kernell source provided by RedHat. If you did, then
>> >> you should download the kernel (possibly from kernel.org) and apply the
>> >> patch compile, etc.) RedHat doesn't provide the complete kernel and as a
>> >> result the built images don't work correct. Sorry I can't give you more
>> >> complete details. Just that it is common to discover you can't build a
>> >> working kernel with speakup from the RedHat source package.
>> >> 
>> >
>> >
>> >_______________________________________________
>> >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: New user encountering problems

[Jacob Schmude]

Hi Brent
	Well, you can certainly turn an option on, bu the results will be
on your own head in rh, at least that's always been my experience. I've
always had trouble with it, especially some of those funky patches that
should not have been applied. My attitude is if I want to test a beta
patch, I'll apply it myself and test it, which I often do. However, I
always have the patch file to reverse it should it not work. RH does not
give you these. I do believe that if we could get rid of some of those
patches, we could successfully build a speakup kernel out of a redhat
source RPM.
	It should be noted, that I'm not bashing RH only. Mandrake and
TurboLinux do this exact same thing. Mandrake is, by far, the absolute
worst distro as far as stability goes. At least RH is pretty stable apart
from its kernel trouble.


On Sat, 23 Sep 2000, Brent Harding wrote:

> I am not real fond of that. Can speakup still be patched in to redhat's
> kernel? What devices are configured in to it's default config file, or
> whatever it does to do it for you when you install a kernel rpm?

Re: New user encountering problems

[Brent Harding]

Does redhat provide a way of making kernel compiling easier? I mean, if I
read a howto, and it says I need a certain option enabled that isn't, is it
easy to just go in and turn that on without messing anything else that
works up?
At 11:58 AM 9/23/00 -0500, you wrote:
>I don't know why you might have had the troubles you mentioned Jacob. I
>have two rethat systems myself and have never had any trouble with custom
>kernels. I don't use make install to place them either.
>
>After doing a make BzImage, I copy the new kernel to my /boot dir and
>update lilo.conf manually. Personally I don't use the "standard" nameing
>scheme. Partly because this only works if you have one kernel. I have
>played arround and when doing stuff may try fiv or six different kernels
>all with slightly different options in them. Instead, I use a date scheme.
>
>My experiance has been that the kernel can be named anything. It can sit
>anyplce on the disk that can be reached using the bios access to the disk.
>
>-- 
>Kirk Wood
>Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
>------------------
>
>Seek simplicity -- and distrust it.
>		Alfred North Whitehead
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Speakup mailing list
>Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
>
>

Re: New user encountering problems

[Victor Tsaran]

I always suggest to take RedHat kernel as it is and just load modules.
Best,
Vic

******* ******* *******
have you thought of visiting Cybertsar's Internet Kingdom? It is still
alive!
Here is the URL:
http://nimbus.ocis.temple.edu/~vtsaran/
******* ******* *******
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brent Harding" <bharding@ufw2.com>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Friday, September 22, 2000 8:55 PM
Subject: Re: New user encountering problems


> I've liked debian for awhile, but tons of stuff won't compile, because the
> locations of files are a little screwy. Why put stuff in non standard
> places I don't know. How does one configure a redhat kernel when compiling
> anyways? I'm thinking about using it some time, suppose I need the 3c59x
> driver support for networking, can I config it like a normal kernel or
does
> redhat have tools to make this easier?
> At 11:24 PM 9/22/00 -0400, you wrote:
> >Hi
> > It is possible to build a speakup kernel from the Red Hat source
> >RPM. Just skip the patches that can't find their files, they don't apply
> >to the i386.
> > However, the kernel will build, but unless you use a rh supplied
> >config, your modules will have unresolved symbols all over the place. I
> >don't think speakup agrees with some of the patches RH applied to their
> >kernel rpm, for it is not a clean source. They've applied all sorts of
> >stuff that are beta, or even alpha. Not wise, I believe they do it to try
> >to get their distro to support more hardware.
> > Personally, I think slackware is the best, closely followed by
> >debian.
> >
> >On Fri, 22 Sep 2000, Kirk Wood wrote:
> >
> >> I believe this is a kernel problem. Once the kernel starts expanding
(you
> >> get the loading and the dots, then the kernel quickly takes over. My
guess
> >> is that you used the kernell source provided by RedHat. If you did,
then
> >> you should download the kernel (possibly from kernel.org) and apply the
> >> patch compile, etc.) RedHat doesn't provide the complete kernel and as
a
> >> result the built images don't work correct. Sorry I can't give you more
> >> complete details. Just that it is common to discover you can't build a
> >> working kernel with speakup from the RedHat source package.
> >>
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >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: New user encountering problems

[Brent Harding]

If one were to do this, how would you get speakup loaded?
At 03:59 PM 9/23/00 -0700, you wrote:
>I always suggest to take RedHat kernel as it is and just load modules.
>Best,
>Vic
>
>******* ******* *******
>have you thought of visiting Cybertsar's Internet Kingdom? It is still
>alive!
>Here is the URL:
>http://nimbus.ocis.temple.edu/~vtsaran/
>******* ******* *******
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Brent Harding" <bharding@ufw2.com>
>To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
>Sent: Friday, September 22, 2000 8:55 PM
>Subject: Re: New user encountering problems
>
>
>> I've liked debian for awhile, but tons of stuff won't compile, because the
>> locations of files are a little screwy. Why put stuff in non standard
>> places I don't know. How does one configure a redhat kernel when compiling
>> anyways? I'm thinking about using it some time, suppose I need the 3c59x
>> driver support for networking, can I config it like a normal kernel or
>does
>> redhat have tools to make this easier?
>> At 11:24 PM 9/22/00 -0400, you wrote:
>> >Hi
>> > It is possible to build a speakup kernel from the Red Hat source
>> >RPM. Just skip the patches that can't find their files, they don't apply
>> >to the i386.
>> > However, the kernel will build, but unless you use a rh supplied
>> >config, your modules will have unresolved symbols all over the place. I
>> >don't think speakup agrees with some of the patches RH applied to their
>> >kernel rpm, for it is not a clean source. They've applied all sorts of
>> >stuff that are beta, or even alpha. Not wise, I believe they do it to try
>> >to get their distro to support more hardware.
>> > Personally, I think slackware is the best, closely followed by
>> >debian.
>> >
>> >On Fri, 22 Sep 2000, Kirk Wood wrote:
>> >
>> >> I believe this is a kernel problem. Once the kernel starts expanding
>(you
>> >> get the loading and the dots, then the kernel quickly takes over. My
>guess
>> >> is that you used the kernell source provided by RedHat. If you did,
>then
>> >> you should download the kernel (possibly from kernel.org) and apply the
>> >> patch compile, etc.) RedHat doesn't provide the complete kernel and as
>a
>> >> result the built images don't work correct. Sorry I can't give you more
>> >> complete details. Just that it is common to discover you can't build a
>> >> working kernel with speakup from the RedHat source package.
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >_______________________________________________
>> >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: New user encountering problems

[Victor Tsaran]

No, no, that was a response to Brad hardin, sorry, if I misspelled your
name.
Best,
Vic

******* ******* *******
have you thought of visiting Cybertsar's Internet Kingdom? It is still
alive!
Here is the URL:
http://nimbus.ocis.temple.edu/~vtsaran/
******* ******* *******
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brent Harding" <bharding@ufw2.com>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Saturday, September 23, 2000 3:25 PM
Subject: Re: New user encountering problems


> If one were to do this, how would you get speakup loaded?
> At 03:59 PM 9/23/00 -0700, you wrote:
> >I always suggest to take RedHat kernel as it is and just load modules.
> >Best,
> >Vic
> >
> >******* ******* *******
> >have you thought of visiting Cybertsar's Internet Kingdom? It is still
> >alive!
> >Here is the URL:
> >http://nimbus.ocis.temple.edu/~vtsaran/
> >******* ******* *******
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Brent Harding" <bharding@ufw2.com>
> >To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> >Sent: Friday, September 22, 2000 8:55 PM
> >Subject: Re: New user encountering problems
> >
> >
> >> I've liked debian for awhile, but tons of stuff won't compile, because
the
> >> locations of files are a little screwy. Why put stuff in non standard
> >> places I don't know. How does one configure a redhat kernel when
compiling
> >> anyways? I'm thinking about using it some time, suppose I need the
3c59x
> >> driver support for networking, can I config it like a normal kernel or
> >does
> >> redhat have tools to make this easier?
> >> At 11:24 PM 9/22/00 -0400, you wrote:
> >> >Hi
> >> > It is possible to build a speakup kernel from the Red Hat source
> >> >RPM. Just skip the patches that can't find their files, they don't
apply
> >> >to the i386.
> >> > However, the kernel will build, but unless you use a rh supplied
> >> >config, your modules will have unresolved symbols all over the place.
I
> >> >don't think speakup agrees with some of the patches RH applied to
their
> >> >kernel rpm, for it is not a clean source. They've applied all sorts of
> >> >stuff that are beta, or even alpha. Not wise, I believe they do it to
try
> >> >to get their distro to support more hardware.
> >> > Personally, I think slackware is the best, closely followed by
> >> >debian.
> >> >
> >> >On Fri, 22 Sep 2000, Kirk Wood wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> I believe this is a kernel problem. Once the kernel starts expanding
> >(you
> >> >> get the loading and the dots, then the kernel quickly takes over. My
> >guess
> >> >> is that you used the kernell source provided by RedHat. If you did,
> >then
> >> >> you should download the kernel (possibly from kernel.org) and apply
the
> >> >> patch compile, etc.) RedHat doesn't provide the complete kernel and
as
> >a
> >> >> result the built images don't work correct. Sorry I can't give you
more
> >> >> complete details. Just that it is common to discover you can't build
a
> >> >> working kernel with speakup from the RedHat source package.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >_______________________________________________
> >> >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: New user encountering problems

[Kerry Hoath]

Debian put stuff in nonstandard places?
Actually Debian is the most FSSTND complient distribution out there at the
moment. You must remember; that the best thing about standards is that there
are so many to choose from.

Regarding "lots of stuff doesn't compile" it usually means the person between
the chair and keyboard has (1) not edited the package Makefiles,
(2) not configured a kernel source tree,
or (3) doesn't have a clue on where the include files live.
Many packages such as the updated network card drivers *REQUIRE* * R E Q U
I R E * a *configured* kernel source tree on the system. The kernel
provides many of the include files necessary for sane compilation, and you
don't get linux/autoconf.h without running make config or equivalent.

I admit that many packages scatter config files all over the file system,
/etc, /usr/lib/ /usr/share; /usr/etc/ /usr/local/etc/ /opt/etc; /var/lib
etc; at least Debian puts *all* config files in etc. This does make it simpler
when your system gets big with lots of packages on it.
There are allways very good reasons why Debian does things the way it does,
for example the conf.modules generated from /etc/modutils/* and the like; either
take a look at the Debian policy documentation, or the docs in /usr/doc

Compiling specialized software on a Linux system requires you to be on nodding
terms with Makefiles and at the very least; able to read the comments in
config files and edit apropriately. Redhat may have more out of the box rpms
but they often don't behave as you'd expect them to out of the box without
a bit of tweeking. Most packages use gnu autoconf so compilation is a breeze;
however learning about your compiler's make system; where system files are etc
is an excellent investment in time if you want to consider yourself a
competant Linux admin or you must tinker with things.

Regards, Kerry.
On Fri, Sep 22, 2000 at 10:55:21PM -0500, Brent Harding wrote:
> I've liked debian for awhile, but tons of stuff won't compile, because the
> locations of files are a little screwy. Why put stuff in non standard
> places I don't know. How does one configure a redhat kernel when compiling
> anyways? I'm thinking about using it some time, suppose I need the 3c59x
> driver support for networking, can I config it like a normal kernel or does
> redhat have tools to make this easier?
> At 11:24 PM 9/22/00 -0400, you wrote:
> >Hi
> >	It is possible to build a speakup kernel from the Red Hat source
> >RPM. Just skip the patches that can't find their files, they don't apply
> >to the i386.
> >	However, the kernel will build, but unless you use a rh supplied
> >config, your modules will have unresolved symbols all over the place. I
> >don't think speakup agrees with some of the patches RH applied to their
> >kernel rpm, for it is not a clean source. They've applied all sorts of
> >stuff that are beta, or even alpha. Not wise, I believe they do it to try
> >to get their distro to support more hardware.
> >	Personally, I think slackware is the best, closely followed by
> >debian.
> >
> >On Fri, 22 Sep 2000, Kirk Wood wrote:
> >
> >> I believe this is a kernel problem. Once the kernel starts expanding (you
> >> get the loading and the dots, then the kernel quickly takes over. My guess
> >> is that you used the kernell source provided by RedHat. If you did, then
> >> you should download the kernel (possibly from kernel.org) and apply the
> >> patch compile, etc.) RedHat doesn't provide the complete kernel and as a
> >> result the built images don't work correct. Sorry I can't give you more
> >> complete details. Just that it is common to discover you can't build a
> >> working kernel with speakup from the RedHat source package.
> >> 
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >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
> 

-- 
--
Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.eu.org
Alternates: kerry@emusys.com.au kerry@gotss.spice.net.au or khoath@lis.net.au
ICQ UIN: 62823451

Re: New user encountering problems

[Kirk Wood]

> Redhat may have more out of the box rpms
> but they often don't behave as you'd expect them to out of the box without
> a bit of tweeking.

This is a bit of an understatement. In fact, a couple times I have had
flashbacks to the evil OS installing a couple things. The assumption that
I want to be like the person they designed the RPM for isn't correct. With
at least one mail transport program out there, you can't fix the problem
with the RPM. You must uninstall the RPM, hunt down a couple config files
left, then configure and compile the way you want things.

While I have found RPM to be handy for some things, others turn to a major
pain.

-- 
Kirk Wood
Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
------------------

Seek simplicity -- and distrust it.
		Alfred North Whitehead

Re: New user encountering problems

[Victor Tsaran]

Hopefully, we can make a constructive discussion here. Please, please,
please! In fact, I must agree with Kerry that Debian seems to follow the
standards that many other distributions such as SunOS, FreeBSD, Irix follow.
However, I like the way Redhat handles initialization files. In general, I
think it was a great idea for them to create a directory for each runlevel
and prepend the script with S for start and K for kill. At least when you do
LS, you are not bombarded with tones of files (actually, you still are!)
Best,
Vic

******* ******* *******
have you thought of visiting Cybertsar's Internet Kingdom? It is still
alive!
Here is the URL:
http://nimbus.ocis.temple.edu/~vtsaran/
******* ******* *******
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kerry Hoath" <kerry@gotss.eu.org>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2000 1:16 AM
Subject: Re: New user encountering problems


> Debian put stuff in nonstandard places?
> Actually Debian is the most FSSTND complient distribution out there at the
> moment. You must remember; that the best thing about standards is that
there
> are so many to choose from.
>
> Regarding "lots of stuff doesn't compile" it usually means the person
between
> the chair and keyboard has (1) not edited the package Makefiles,
> (2) not configured a kernel source tree,
> or (3) doesn't have a clue on where the include files live.
> Many packages such as the updated network card drivers *REQUIRE* * R E Q U
> I R E * a *configured* kernel source tree on the system. The kernel
> provides many of the include files necessary for sane compilation, and you
> don't get linux/autoconf.h without running make config or equivalent.
>
> I admit that many packages scatter config files all over the file system,
> /etc, /usr/lib/ /usr/share; /usr/etc/ /usr/local/etc/ /opt/etc; /var/lib
> etc; at least Debian puts *all* config files in etc. This does make it
simpler
> when your system gets big with lots of packages on it.
> There are allways very good reasons why Debian does things the way it
does,
> for example the conf.modules generated from /etc/modutils/* and the like;
either
> take a look at the Debian policy documentation, or the docs in /usr/doc
>
> Compiling specialized software on a Linux system requires you to be on
nodding
> terms with Makefiles and at the very least; able to read the comments in
> config files and edit apropriately. Redhat may have more out of the box
rpms
> but they often don't behave as you'd expect them to out of the box without
> a bit of tweeking. Most packages use gnu autoconf so compilation is a
breeze;
> however learning about your compiler's make system; where system files are
etc
> is an excellent investment in time if you want to consider yourself a
> competant Linux admin or you must tinker with things.
>
> Regards, Kerry.
> On Fri, Sep 22, 2000 at 10:55:21PM -0500, Brent Harding wrote:
> > I've liked debian for awhile, but tons of stuff won't compile, because
the
> > locations of files are a little screwy. Why put stuff in non standard
> > places I don't know. How does one configure a redhat kernel when
compiling
> > anyways? I'm thinking about using it some time, suppose I need the 3c59x
> > driver support for networking, can I config it like a normal kernel or
does
> > redhat have tools to make this easier?
> > At 11:24 PM 9/22/00 -0400, you wrote:
> > >Hi
> > > It is possible to build a speakup kernel from the Red Hat source
> > >RPM. Just skip the patches that can't find their files, they don't
apply
> > >to the i386.
> > > However, the kernel will build, but unless you use a rh supplied
> > >config, your modules will have unresolved symbols all over the place. I
> > >don't think speakup agrees with some of the patches RH applied to their
> > >kernel rpm, for it is not a clean source. They've applied all sorts of
> > >stuff that are beta, or even alpha. Not wise, I believe they do it to
try
> > >to get their distro to support more hardware.
> > > Personally, I think slackware is the best, closely followed by
> > >debian.
> > >
> > >On Fri, 22 Sep 2000, Kirk Wood wrote:
> > >
> > >> I believe this is a kernel problem. Once the kernel starts expanding
(you
> > >> get the loading and the dots, then the kernel quickly takes over. My
guess
> > >> is that you used the kernell source provided by RedHat. If you did,
then
> > >> you should download the kernel (possibly from kernel.org) and apply
the
> > >> patch compile, etc.) RedHat doesn't provide the complete kernel and
as a
> > >> result the built images don't work correct. Sorry I can't give you
more
> > >> complete details. Just that it is common to discover you can't build
a
> > >> working kernel with speakup from the RedHat source package.
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >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
> >
>
> --
> --
> Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.eu.org
> Alternates: kerry@emusys.com.au kerry@gotss.spice.net.au or
khoath@lis.net.au
> ICQ UIN: 62823451
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Distro discusion

[Kirk Wood]

Personally, the biggest thing that I believe is important on a
distribution is good documentation on where files are placed. Having said
that, I think it is past time for the distributions to discuss this and
commit to following a standard (or two). Certainly there will be
differences in such things as init scripts. After all Slackware uses a BSD
style init (more or less) while RedHat uses a SystemV ini (more or less).

There are advantages to both of them, and that isn't the point. The thing
is that RedHat does place some config files in strange places. If there
was one place to put a given file it would make Linux overall
stronger. There could still be room for each to do its thing for
improvement. (For instance once you say that all init scripts will reside
in rc.d you can choose to follow the redhat method of a directory for each
run level and one for the actual scripts. Or you could decide to place
them all in the /etc/rc.d dir.)

Actually, documentation is the biggest weakness I see in Linux. The fact
is that much of the documentation is great if you already know what your
doing. Some of it is great, and some is lousy. Sometimes knowing whre to
look though can be a major task in the first place. One master document
giving direction on where to look for all network functions would be
nice. One covering all disk subsystems would also go a long way.

-- 
Kirk Wood
Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
------------------

Seek simplicity -- and distrust it.
		Alfred North Whitehead

Re: Distro discusion

[Chris Nestrud]

Their is a document called the linux filesystem standard, which I can't
seem to find an URL for now, but which discusses what you're talking
about. I think Debian adheres to this document with its packages, placing
config files in /etc, the package bins in /usr/bin, package libs in
/usr/lib, etc. The linuxdoc.org site probably has that document.

Chris


On Mon, 25 Sep 2000, Kirk Wood wrote:

> Personally, the biggest thing that I believe is important on a
> distribution is good documentation on where files are placed. Having said
> that, I think it is past time for the distributions to discuss this and
> commit to following a standard (or two). Certainly there will be
> differences in such things as init scripts. After all Slackware uses a BSD
> style init (more or less) while RedHat uses a SystemV ini (more or less).
> 
> There are advantages to both of them, and that isn't the point. The thing
> is that RedHat does place some config files in strange places. If there
> was one place to put a given file it would make Linux overall
> stronger. There could still be room for each to do its thing for
> improvement. (For instance once you say that all init scripts will reside
> in rc.d you can choose to follow the redhat method of a directory for each
> run level and one for the actual scripts. Or you could decide to place
> them all in the /etc/rc.d dir.)
> 
> Actually, documentation is the biggest weakness I see in Linux. The fact
> is that much of the documentation is great if you already know what your
> doing. Some of it is great, and some is lousy. Sometimes knowing whre to
> look though can be a major task in the first place. One master document
> giving direction on where to look for all network functions would be
> nice. One covering all disk subsystems would also go a long way.
> 
> -- 
> Kirk Wood
> Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
> ------------------
> 
> Seek simplicity -- and distrust it.
> 		Alfred North Whitehead
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 

Re: Distro discusion

[Kirk Wood]

I am familiar with the document on where files should be placed. I don't
know from first had how Debian is, but they seem to be the most compliant
distribution arround. I know they try to follow the standard on file
placement. They also work hard to reduce the amount of unneeded internet
traffic downloading a lot of options you won't use anyway. I also like the
idea of choosing what goes into your system.

I have yet to take the time to try it out though. I did try Corel linux
which is based off Debian. Though I liked the package concept, Corel made
too many insane dependancies. For instance in Corel you can't have X
without having a lot of crap. For instance it forces you to have NFS,
Samba, and another file sharing mechanism. That is insane, I don't want to
share files just cause I want a GUI. That is not a good connection.

-- 
Kirk Wood
Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
------------------

Seek simplicity -- and distrust it.
		Alfred North Whitehead

Re: Distro discusion

[Gene Collins]

Kirk, http://www.linuxdoc.org/ is your documentation friend!  There are
very explicit howtos out there for hardware and various software. 
Debian also follows the Sys V. init style.  The thing I find most
helpful about Debian is that the apt-get installation program manages
software dependentcies for you very nicely.  If you upgrade gcc for
example, apt-get will also upgrade the appropriate libraries.

Gene

>Personally, the biggest thing that I believe is important on a
>distribution is good documentation on where files are placed. Having said
>that, I think it is past time for the distributions to discuss this and
>commit to following a standard (or two). Certainly there will be
>differences in such things as init scripts. After all Slackware uses a BSD
>style init (more or less) while RedHat uses a SystemV ini (more or less).
>
>There are advantages to both of them, and that isn't the point. The thing
>is that RedHat does place some config files in strange places. If there
>was one place to put a given file it would make Linux overall
>stronger. There could still be room for each to do its thing for
>improvement. (For instance once you say that all init scripts will reside
>in rc.d you can choose to follow the redhat method of a directory for each
>run level and one for the actual scripts. Or you could decide to place
>them all in the /etc/rc.d dir.)
>
>Actually, documentation is the biggest weakness I see in Linux. The fact
>is that much of the documentation is great if you already know what your
>doing. Some of it is great, and some is lousy. Sometimes knowing whre to
>look though can be a major task in the first place. One master document
>giving direction on where to look for all network functions would be
>nice. One covering all disk subsystems would also go a long way.
>
>-- 
>Kirk Wood
>Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
>------------------
>
>Seek simplicity -- and distrust it.
>		Alfred North Whitehead
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Speakup mailing list
>Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: Distro discusion

[Victor Tsaran]

For those who would like to know, Redhat offers a similar utility to
Debian's update. Redhat calls it rpmfind. You specify a word on the command
line and rpmfind wills earch the database for it, if it finds, it tells you
allthe dependences, you just hit "download all" option.
Best,
Vic
******* ******* *******
have you thought of visiting Cybertsar's Internet Kingdom? It is still
alive!
Here is the URL:
http://nimbus.ocis.temple.edu/~vtsaran/
******* ******* *******
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gene Collins" <collins@gene3.cc.iastate.edu>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2000 9:24 AM
Subject: Re: Distro discusion


> Kirk, http://www.linuxdoc.org/ is your documentation friend!  There are
> very explicit howtos out there for hardware and various software.
> Debian also follows the Sys V. init style.  The thing I find most
> helpful about Debian is that the apt-get installation program manages
> software dependentcies for you very nicely.  If you upgrade gcc for
> example, apt-get will also upgrade the appropriate libraries.
>
> Gene
>
> >Personally, the biggest thing that I believe is important on a
> >distribution is good documentation on where files are placed. Having said
> >that, I think it is past time for the distributions to discuss this and
> >commit to following a standard (or two). Certainly there will be
> >differences in such things as init scripts. After all Slackware uses a
BSD
> >style init (more or less) while RedHat uses a SystemV ini (more or less).
> >
> >There are advantages to both of them, and that isn't the point. The thing
> >is that RedHat does place some config files in strange places. If there
> >was one place to put a given file it would make Linux overall
> >stronger. There could still be room for each to do its thing for
> >improvement. (For instance once you say that all init scripts will reside
> >in rc.d you can choose to follow the redhat method of a directory for
each
> >run level and one for the actual scripts. Or you could decide to place
> >them all in the /etc/rc.d dir.)
> >
> >Actually, documentation is the biggest weakness I see in Linux. The fact
> >is that much of the documentation is great if you already know what your
> >doing. Some of it is great, and some is lousy. Sometimes knowing whre to
> >look though can be a major task in the first place. One master document
> >giving direction on where to look for all network functions would be
> >nice. One covering all disk subsystems would also go a long way.
> >
> >--
> >Kirk Wood
> >Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
> >------------------
> >
> >Seek simplicity -- and distrust it.
> > Alfred North Whitehead
> >
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >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: Distro discusion

[Jacob Schmude]

Hi
	Yes, this is true, but the concept is slightly different. rpmfind
will do just that, find an RPM. You really don't know who built it, or
even whether it will work at all. Sometimes the config files are in odd
places, and older libraries are needed. Some want to downgrade libraries
that should never be downgraded, such as the slang or glibc
libraries. More annoying, though, is when it pops up with a SuSE
rpm. Since the SuSE linux distro uses different package names, odds are
that dependencies will not be met with these on non-SuSE systems.

On Wed, 27 Sep 2000, Victor Tsaran wrote:

> 
> For those who would like to know, Redhat offers a similar utility to
> Debian's update. Redhat calls it rpmfind. You specify a word on the command
> line and rpmfind wills earch the database for it, if it finds, it tells you
> allthe dependences, you just hit "download all" option.

Re: Distro discusion

[Brent Harding]

Wow, when I get a decent network connection, redhat it'll be. Could a
redhat 55.2 box be updated to 6.2 this way?
At 06:05 PM 9/27/00 -0700, you wrote:
>
>For those who would like to know, Redhat offers a similar utility to
>Debian's update. Redhat calls it rpmfind. You specify a word on the command
>line and rpmfind wills earch the database for it, if it finds, it tells you
>allthe dependences, you just hit "download all" option.
>Best,
>Vic
>******* ******* *******
>have you thought of visiting Cybertsar's Internet Kingdom? It is still
>alive!
>Here is the URL:
>http://nimbus.ocis.temple.edu/~vtsaran/
>******* ******* *******
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Gene Collins" <collins@gene3.cc.iastate.edu>
>To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
>Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2000 9:24 AM
>Subject: Re: Distro discusion
>
>
>> Kirk, http://www.linuxdoc.org/ is your documentation friend!  There are
>> very explicit howtos out there for hardware and various software.
>> Debian also follows the Sys V. init style.  The thing I find most
>> helpful about Debian is that the apt-get installation program manages
>> software dependentcies for you very nicely.  If you upgrade gcc for
>> example, apt-get will also upgrade the appropriate libraries.
>>
>> Gene
>>
>> >Personally, the biggest thing that I believe is important on a
>> >distribution is good documentation on where files are placed. Having said
>> >that, I think it is past time for the distributions to discuss this and
>> >commit to following a standard (or two). Certainly there will be
>> >differences in such things as init scripts. After all Slackware uses a
>BSD
>> >style init (more or less) while RedHat uses a SystemV ini (more or less).
>> >
>> >There are advantages to both of them, and that isn't the point. The thing
>> >is that RedHat does place some config files in strange places. If there
>> >was one place to put a given file it would make Linux overall
>> >stronger. There could still be room for each to do its thing for
>> >improvement. (For instance once you say that all init scripts will reside
>> >in rc.d you can choose to follow the redhat method of a directory for
>each
>> >run level and one for the actual scripts. Or you could decide to place
>> >them all in the /etc/rc.d dir.)
>> >
>> >Actually, documentation is the biggest weakness I see in Linux. The fact
>> >is that much of the documentation is great if you already know what your
>> >doing. Some of it is great, and some is lousy. Sometimes knowing whre to
>> >look though can be a major task in the first place. One master document
>> >giving direction on where to look for all network functions would be
>> >nice. One covering all disk subsystems would also go a long way.
>> >
>> >--
>> >Kirk Wood
>> >Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
>> >------------------
>> >
>> >Seek simplicity -- and distrust it.
>> > Alfred North Whitehead
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >_______________________________________________
>> >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: Distro discusion

[Victor Tsaran]

Absolutely. You will just use http or FTP option to do that.
Vic

******* ******* *******
have you thought of visiting Cybertsar's Internet Kingdom? It is still
alive!
Here is the URL:
http://nimbus.ocis.temple.edu/~vtsaran/
******* ******* *******
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brent Harding" <bharding@ufw2.com>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2000 8:02 PM
Subject: Re: Distro discusion


> Wow, when I get a decent network connection, redhat it'll be. Could a
> redhat 55.2 box be updated to 6.2 this way?
> At 06:05 PM 9/27/00 -0700, you wrote:
> >
> >For those who would like to know, Redhat offers a similar utility to
> >Debian's update. Redhat calls it rpmfind. You specify a word on the
command
> >line and rpmfind wills earch the database for it, if it finds, it tells
you
> >allthe dependences, you just hit "download all" option.
> >Best,
> >Vic
> >******* ******* *******
> >have you thought of visiting Cybertsar's Internet Kingdom? It is still
> >alive!
> >Here is the URL:
> >http://nimbus.ocis.temple.edu/~vtsaran/
> >******* ******* *******
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Gene Collins" <collins@gene3.cc.iastate.edu>
> >To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> >Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2000 9:24 AM
> >Subject: Re: Distro discusion
> >
> >
> >> Kirk, http://www.linuxdoc.org/ is your documentation friend!  There are
> >> very explicit howtos out there for hardware and various software.
> >> Debian also follows the Sys V. init style.  The thing I find most
> >> helpful about Debian is that the apt-get installation program manages
> >> software dependentcies for you very nicely.  If you upgrade gcc for
> >> example, apt-get will also upgrade the appropriate libraries.
> >>
> >> Gene
> >>
> >> >Personally, the biggest thing that I believe is important on a
> >> >distribution is good documentation on where files are placed. Having
said
> >> >that, I think it is past time for the distributions to discuss this
and
> >> >commit to following a standard (or two). Certainly there will be
> >> >differences in such things as init scripts. After all Slackware uses a
> >BSD
> >> >style init (more or less) while RedHat uses a SystemV ini (more or
less).
> >> >
> >> >There are advantages to both of them, and that isn't the point. The
thing
> >> >is that RedHat does place some config files in strange places. If
there
> >> >was one place to put a given file it would make Linux overall
> >> >stronger. There could still be room for each to do its thing for
> >> >improvement. (For instance once you say that all init scripts will
reside
> >> >in rc.d you can choose to follow the redhat method of a directory for
> >each
> >> >run level and one for the actual scripts. Or you could decide to place
> >> >them all in the /etc/rc.d dir.)
> >> >
> >> >Actually, documentation is the biggest weakness I see in Linux. The
fact
> >> >is that much of the documentation is great if you already know what
your
> >> >doing. Some of it is great, and some is lousy. Sometimes knowing whre
to
> >> >look though can be a major task in the first place. One master
document
> >> >giving direction on where to look for all network functions would be
> >> >nice. One covering all disk subsystems would also go a long way.
> >> >
> >> >--
> >> >Kirk Wood
> >> >Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
> >> >------------------
> >> >
> >> >Seek simplicity -- and distrust it.
> >> > Alfred North Whitehead
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >_______________________________________________
> >> >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: Distro discusion

[Brent Harding]

Can this be done by telnet if it has to be?
At 08:41 PM 9/28/00 -0700, you wrote:
>Absolutely. You will just use http or FTP option to do that.
>Vic
>
>******* ******* *******
>have you thought of visiting Cybertsar's Internet Kingdom? It is still
>alive!
>Here is the URL:
>http://nimbus.ocis.temple.edu/~vtsaran/
>******* ******* *******
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Brent Harding" <bharding@ufw2.com>
>To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
>Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2000 8:02 PM
>Subject: Re: Distro discusion
>
>
>> Wow, when I get a decent network connection, redhat it'll be. Could a
>> redhat 55.2 box be updated to 6.2 this way?
>> At 06:05 PM 9/27/00 -0700, you wrote:
>> >
>> >For those who would like to know, Redhat offers a similar utility to
>> >Debian's update. Redhat calls it rpmfind. You specify a word on the
>command
>> >line and rpmfind wills earch the database for it, if it finds, it tells
>you
>> >allthe dependences, you just hit "download all" option.
>> >Best,
>> >Vic
>> >******* ******* *******
>> >have you thought of visiting Cybertsar's Internet Kingdom? It is still
>> >alive!
>> >Here is the URL:
>> >http://nimbus.ocis.temple.edu/~vtsaran/
>> >******* ******* *******
>> >----- Original Message -----
>> >From: "Gene Collins" <collins@gene3.cc.iastate.edu>
>> >To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
>> >Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2000 9:24 AM
>> >Subject: Re: Distro discusion
>> >
>> >
>> >> Kirk, http://www.linuxdoc.org/ is your documentation friend!  There are
>> >> very explicit howtos out there for hardware and various software.
>> >> Debian also follows the Sys V. init style.  The thing I find most
>> >> helpful about Debian is that the apt-get installation program manages
>> >> software dependentcies for you very nicely.  If you upgrade gcc for
>> >> example, apt-get will also upgrade the appropriate libraries.
>> >>
>> >> Gene
>> >>
>> >> >Personally, the biggest thing that I believe is important on a
>> >> >distribution is good documentation on where files are placed. Having
>said
>> >> >that, I think it is past time for the distributions to discuss this
>and
>> >> >commit to following a standard (or two). Certainly there will be
>> >> >differences in such things as init scripts. After all Slackware uses a
>> >BSD
>> >> >style init (more or less) while RedHat uses a SystemV ini (more or
>less).
>> >> >
>> >> >There are advantages to both of them, and that isn't the point. The
>thing
>> >> >is that RedHat does place some config files in strange places. If
>there
>> >> >was one place to put a given file it would make Linux overall
>> >> >stronger. There could still be room for each to do its thing for
>> >> >improvement. (For instance once you say that all init scripts will
>reside
>> >> >in rc.d you can choose to follow the redhat method of a directory for
>> >each
>> >> >run level and one for the actual scripts. Or you could decide to place
>> >> >them all in the /etc/rc.d dir.)
>> >> >
>> >> >Actually, documentation is the biggest weakness I see in Linux. The
>fact
>> >> >is that much of the documentation is great if you already know what
>your
>> >> >doing. Some of it is great, and some is lousy. Sometimes knowing whre
>to
>> >> >look though can be a major task in the first place. One master
>document
>> >> >giving direction on where to look for all network functions would be
>> >> >nice. One covering all disk subsystems would also go a long way.
>> >> >
>> >> >--
>> >> >Kirk Wood
>> >> >Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
>> >> >------------------
>> >> >
>> >> >Seek simplicity -- and distrust it.
>> >> > Alfred North Whitehead
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >_______________________________________________
>> >> >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
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Speakup mailing list
>Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
>
>

Re: New user encountering problems

[Brent Harding]

I liked the rc.d structure slackware offered. I don't like that debian has
no netconfig utility, so even localhost had no route on default install.
Redhat may be a worthwhile switch, as all the howtos show how to do things
in redhat, there's not been published modified howtos for debian as far as
I know of.
At 08:26 PM 9/25/00 -0700, you wrote:
>Hopefully, we can make a constructive discussion here. Please, please,
>please! In fact, I must agree with Kerry that Debian seems to follow the
>standards that many other distributions such as SunOS, FreeBSD, Irix follow.
>However, I like the way Redhat handles initialization files. In general, I
>think it was a great idea for them to create a directory for each runlevel
>and prepend the script with S for start and K for kill. At least when you do
>LS, you are not bombarded with tones of files (actually, you still are!)
>Best,
>Vic
>
>******* ******* *******
>have you thought of visiting Cybertsar's Internet Kingdom? It is still
>alive!
>Here is the URL:
>http://nimbus.ocis.temple.edu/~vtsaran/
>******* ******* *******
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Kerry Hoath" <kerry@gotss.eu.org>
>To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
>Sent: Monday, September 25, 2000 1:16 AM
>Subject: Re: New user encountering problems
>
>
>> Debian put stuff in nonstandard places?
>> Actually Debian is the most FSSTND complient distribution out there at the
>> moment. You must remember; that the best thing about standards is that
>there
>> are so many to choose from.
>>
>> Regarding "lots of stuff doesn't compile" it usually means the person
>between
>> the chair and keyboard has (1) not edited the package Makefiles,
>> (2) not configured a kernel source tree,
>> or (3) doesn't have a clue on where the include files live.
>> Many packages such as the updated network card drivers *REQUIRE* * R E Q U
>> I R E * a *configured* kernel source tree on the system. The kernel
>> provides many of the include files necessary for sane compilation, and you
>> don't get linux/autoconf.h without running make config or equivalent.
>>
>> I admit that many packages scatter config files all over the file system,
>> /etc, /usr/lib/ /usr/share; /usr/etc/ /usr/local/etc/ /opt/etc; /var/lib
>> etc; at least Debian puts *all* config files in etc. This does make it
>simpler
>> when your system gets big with lots of packages on it.
>> There are allways very good reasons why Debian does things the way it
>does,
>> for example the conf.modules generated from /etc/modutils/* and the like;
>either
>> take a look at the Debian policy documentation, or the docs in /usr/doc
>>
>> Compiling specialized software on a Linux system requires you to be on
>nodding
>> terms with Makefiles and at the very least; able to read the comments in
>> config files and edit apropriately. Redhat may have more out of the box
>rpms
>> but they often don't behave as you'd expect them to out of the box without
>> a bit of tweeking. Most packages use gnu autoconf so compilation is a
>breeze;
>> however learning about your compiler's make system; where system files are
>etc
>> is an excellent investment in time if you want to consider yourself a
>> competant Linux admin or you must tinker with things.
>>
>> Regards, Kerry.
>> On Fri, Sep 22, 2000 at 10:55:21PM -0500, Brent Harding wrote:
>> > I've liked debian for awhile, but tons of stuff won't compile, because
>the
>> > locations of files are a little screwy. Why put stuff in non standard
>> > places I don't know. How does one configure a redhat kernel when
>compiling
>> > anyways? I'm thinking about using it some time, suppose I need the 3c59x
>> > driver support for networking, can I config it like a normal kernel or
>does
>> > redhat have tools to make this easier?
>> > At 11:24 PM 9/22/00 -0400, you wrote:
>> > >Hi
>> > > It is possible to build a speakup kernel from the Red Hat source
>> > >RPM. Just skip the patches that can't find their files, they don't
>apply
>> > >to the i386.
>> > > However, the kernel will build, but unless you use a rh supplied
>> > >config, your modules will have unresolved symbols all over the place. I
>> > >don't think speakup agrees with some of the patches RH applied to their
>> > >kernel rpm, for it is not a clean source. They've applied all sorts of
>> > >stuff that are beta, or even alpha. Not wise, I believe they do it to
>try
>> > >to get their distro to support more hardware.
>> > > Personally, I think slackware is the best, closely followed by
>> > >debian.
>> > >
>> > >On Fri, 22 Sep 2000, Kirk Wood wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> I believe this is a kernel problem. Once the kernel starts expanding
>(you
>> > >> get the loading and the dots, then the kernel quickly takes over. My
>guess
>> > >> is that you used the kernell source provided by RedHat. If you did,
>then
>> > >> you should download the kernel (possibly from kernel.org) and apply
>the
>> > >> patch compile, etc.) RedHat doesn't provide the complete kernel and
>as a
>> > >> result the built images don't work correct. Sorry I can't give you
>more
>> > >> complete details. Just that it is common to discover you can't build
>a
>> > >> working kernel with speakup from the RedHat source package.
>> > >>
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >_______________________________________________
>> > >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
>> >
>>
>> --
>> --
>> Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.eu.org
>> Alternates: kerry@emusys.com.au kerry@gotss.spice.net.au or
>khoath@lis.net.au
>> ICQ UIN: 62823451
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
>
>

HOWTOs (was Re: New user encountering problems)

[Jacob Schmude]

Hi
	You do not need modified HOWTOs. All you need to do is hunt down
the config files and change them manually.

On Tue, 26 Sep 2000, Brent Harding wrote:

> I liked the rc.d structure slackware offered. I don't like that debian has
> no netconfig utility, so even localhost had no route on default install.
> Redhat may be a worthwhile switch, as all the howtos show how to do things
> in redhat, there's not been published modified howtos for debian as far as
> I know of.

Re: New user encountering problems

[Jacob Schmude]

Hi
	Well, the first issue sounds like a link is wrong. For a RedHat
6.2 system, here's how to go about installing the kernel:
	1. cd /usr/src/linux
	2. configure it with make config. When the speakup option appears,
press y. Now, make sure you select the correct synth. When it prompts you,
for the synth, enter "decexp" without the quotes. Finish configuring
	3. make dep clean modules
	4. Now move the old modules directory to a new name to avoid
symbol version conflicts. The command to do it is (assuming kernel version
is 2.2.14-5.0):
mv /lib/modules/2.2.14-5.0 /lib/modules/2.2.14-5.0.old
	5. make modules_install
	6. make bzImage
	Now, check a few things. Check lilo.conf to make sure it is
configured to use the kernel version you have. assuming you simply
installed the kernel-source provided with RH 6.2, and haven't made any
modifications to lilo.conf, it should be set up correctly for you already.
	Now, finally type make install. This will take care of the links
to the kernel for you. RH has a different way to do this than other
distros.
	You shouldn't modify kernel links manually on RH, it seems to be
picky. It also seems to be the distro most sensitive to any kernel change.

	Now, let's deal with the synth problem. My guess is that speakup
is not finding the synth. Put the synth on com1 and supply this parameter
to your kernel command line:
speakup_ser=0
	To do this, assuming you were booting with the disk image that
works, you would type the following at the boot: prompt
linux speakup_ser=0
	I'm not precisely sure how rh creates their bootdisks. I believe
it will append the root=/dev/partition line automatically, but if not you
must also supply that parameter.

Hope this helps.

Jacob

Re: New user encountering problems

[William F. Acker WB2FLW +1-303-777-8123]

Hi Jerry,

     Just call the number at the top of this message or send yours, and I 
should be able to get you up and running.  In the meantime,  download the 
kernel rpm files from updates.redhat.com.  Then, do an rpm -FUv
kernel*2.2.16-3*rpm.  After that, type "lilo".  Contrary to the noise,
the RedHat source tree works fine with Speakup.



          HTH.
          Bill in Denver

On Fri, 22 Sep 2000, Jerry
Robinette wrote:

> Hi;
> 
> I apologize for the length of this. I'm trying to help a blind buddy of mine get access to Linux and we were very excited about the possibilities of Speakup. Unfortunately, our first attempts have crashed and burned, and I didn't see anything relevant in the documentation or the archive, so I thought I'd try the list.
> 
> The system is a Pentium 120, running RedHat 6.2, kernal 2.2.14. They synthesizer involved is a DECTalk Express. This hardware all works without problem under a variety of Windows OSs (this is on a test system at our office). I have successfully compiled and installed custom kernels before, but it has been many months, so I am open to "user error" as the cause.
> 
> When we downloaded the speakup-patch tar.gz, the patch applied without problem (except for prompting about system architectures like PPC, MIPS, etc.). The Speakup option did not appear in a "make xconfig" but it did in "make config" and the compilation seemed OK (no errors, etc.)
> 
> We copied the new kernel & system.map into the /boot directory and adjusted the links exactly as described in the INSTALLATION document. When we boot, we get "LILO" then on the next line "loading Linux ...." and then it just stalls. No sound, no boot, no nothing!
> 
> Out of curiousity, we made a RedHat 6.2 bootdisk out of the appropriate image file, and it boots just fine, but we get no sound at all from the synth.
> 
> So the questions are:
> 
> Does the first issue sound like a kernel problem, or a LILO issue? Is there a really clear and complete set of instructions on changing LILO to use a new kernel? (LILO took my lilo.conf OK, and responded "added Linux" but that may not mean anything, I guess.)
> 
> Does it matter which serial port the DECTalk Express is on? We tried it on both one and two, with the same results. Does Speakup probe for the right port?
> 
> I believe the serial port defaults to 38400 bps, and I understand the DECTalk can only handle 9600. Do I need to put "serial=9600n8" in the global section of the lilo.con for this to work at all? Or does this matter?
> 
> We're both excited by the potential, and I can guarantee you that when John gets up and running he will be sending you all manner of DECTalk info, requests, kudos, etc.
> 
> Thanks for any help you can provide!
> 
> Jerry
> 
> 
>  
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>