text console tools for audio processing

text console tools for audio processing

[Chuck Hallenbeck]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi,

For some time I have been putting together a package that simplifies
many common audio editing tasks, and I think it might be of interest to
some here. It is called wedit, and is a GPL package available on my web
site. 

Wedit is partly a front-end to many common gnu/linux tools such as sox,
lame, mplayer, timidity, flac, and others. But it also includes many
intrinsic abilities for editing, smoothing, track and clip manipulation,
etc.

When installed, wedit can be run interactively, or can be invoked as a
non-interactive command line tool by one of its many aliases (symlinks,
actually) to convert an audio file from one format to another,
optionally doing other things while converting.

For example, to convert a wave file of any sampling rate, either mono
or stereo, to a burnable CDR format, you would do this:

wed2cdr filename.wav

to convert any type of wave file to mp3 using 22K samples with stereo,
do this:

wed2mp3 -22s filename.wav

To convert a midi file to Sun audio format (8K samples, 8 bit bytes,
u-law) do this:

wed2au filename.mid

etc., etc., etc.

Wedit has extensive online help and a man page, which are maybe 95%
accurate on a good day. There are of course a lot of features offered
by sox, lame, and mplayer which are not available to wedit users, but
the tradeoff here is simplicity of use over completeness of function.
If sox can do something that wedit won't let you do, well then, use
sox. 

Help yourself. Money back guaranteed.

Chuck

PS: Oh es. Wedit can also generate certain simple tones for test
purposes, such as sine waves, square waves, and both kinds of sawtooth
waves, can emulate motion of a sound source, do fading, capture audio
from your sound card (for many sound cards), and lots of other fun
thngs, but only in its interactive mode. It might not do what you need
it to do, but it does so many thngs that you really should give it a
shot before giving up and regressing to windows.


- -- 
The Moon is Waxing Gibbous (95% of Full)

My web site: http://hallenbeck.ftml.net and my cell phone: 1-518-334-9022.
                                --------
 "With us nothing has time to gather meaning, and too many things
are occurring for even a big heart to hold."
- --W. B. Yeats
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkhWLk4ACgkQ0maTgpPXM9fJTQCff51utX7f3HqBKlJbknQU63uF
A5gAnRxdv+e9FaNTXynFLY6jDszHIGQT
=RfZ8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

text console tools for audio processing

[John covici]

Will wedit do any kind of fast forward/rewind or, better yet, audio on
as you page up and down the file?

-- 
Your life is like a penny.  You're going to lose it.  The question is:
How do
you spend it?

         John Covici
         covici@ccs.covici.com

Re: text console tools for audio processing

[Janina Sajka]

I want to say that I am a very satisfied wedit user. I do a lot of
editing in wedit. It's not perfect, and I don't believe Chuck claims
anything like that. But, it's pretty darn handy in my life.

To answer your question, John, ...

I don't believe there's any real time control of audio playback or
bookmark capibility. Might be nice, but not there. However, I have found
it quite easy to home in on a particular region of audio in Wedit using
it's play from percantage to percentage feature. For instance, on
Wedit's third level I might issue a command like:

play 20-40

which plays from 20% to 40% in the file. When I'm snipping unwanted
sound, I might even go to something as fine as:

snip 0-0.7892

Of course, I've first done some play commands that focused me on that
value.

Janina

John covici writes:
> Will wedit do any kind of fast forward/rewind or, better yet, audio on
> as you page up and down the file?
> 
> -- 
> Your life is like a penny.  You're going to lose it.  The question is:
> How do
> you spend it?
> 
>          John Covici
>          covici@ccs.covici.com
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 

Janina Sajka,	Phone:	+1.202.595.7777;	sip:janina@a11y.org
Partner, Capital Accessibility LLC	http://CapitalAccessibility.Com

Marketing the Owasys 22C talking screenless cell phone in the U.S. and Canada
Learn more at http://ScreenlessPhone.Com

Chair, Open Accessibility	janina@a11y.org	
Linux Foundation		http://a11y.org

Re: text console tools for audio processing

[luke]

On Tue, 17 Jun 2008, Janina Sajka wrote:

> I don't believe there's any real time control of audio playback or
> bookmark capibility. Might be nice, but not there. However, I have found

No bookmarks, but mplayer's text version can do the former well enough 
(it's an unresponsive beast some times, but it does the job).

> it quite easy to home in on a particular region of audio in Wedit using
> it's play from percantage to percentage feature. For instance, on
> Wedit's third level I might issue a command like:
> 
> play 20-40
> 
> which plays from 20% to 40% in the file. When I'm snipping unwanted
> sound, I might even go to something as fine as:
> 
> snip 0-0.7892

That will be a very interesting feature for me in particular, although 
doing it by percentage instead of by seconds and divisions of seconds, 
such as "sox file1.wav file2.wav trim 17:05.5218 2.1143" would be a bit 
strange, although I suspect it can work in that mode as well, as he's 
probably just invoking sox to do the actual editing.

Luke

Re: text console tools for audio processing

[Chuck Hallenbeck]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi Luke,

On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 03:32:16PM -0400, luke wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Jun 2008, Janina Sajka wrote:
> 
> That will be a very interesting feature for me in particular, although 
> doing it by percentage instead of by seconds and divisions of seconds, 
> such as "sox file1.wav file2.wav trim 17:05.5218 2.1143" would be a bit 
> strange, although I suspect it can work in that mode as well, as he's 
> probably just invoking sox to do the actual editing.
> 
> Luke

You can identify a point in a file either by percentages, or by
minutes:seconds. A number without a colon is interpreted as a percent
of the total length, a number with a colon is taken as minutes colon
seconds, with the seconds part permitting a decimal point.

Copy, snipp8ing, killing, and zapping a region of a track is done
natively by wedit rather than relying on soc, since it is perfomred on
the memory image of the file, not the file itself. Edges produced by
those operations are faded sinusoidally over a 100 ms interval. The
analogy is a diagonal splice of audio tape, except the slope of the
splice is a half cycle of a sine wave instead of linear.

HTH

Chuck





- -- 
The Moon is Waxing Gibbous (97% of Full)

My web site: http://hallenbeck.ftml.net and my cell phone: 1-518-334-9022.
                                --------
 "With us nothing has time to gather meaning, and too many things
are occurring for even a big heart to hold."
- --W. B. Yeats
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkhWwqgACgkQ0maTgpPXM9fQ+ACbB1/nour9XCzf7FR9FaJ4fQAC
eEIAn3Gqwij2jtKK85C/2278mJQIGivI
=nPqr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: text console tools for audio processing

[luke]

On Mon, 16 Jun 2008, Chuck Hallenbeck wrote:

> You can identify a point in a file either by percentages, or by
> minutes:seconds. A number without a colon is interpreted as a percent
> of the total length, a number with a colon is taken as minutes colon
> seconds, with the seconds part permitting a decimal point.

Meaning that I would need "00:30.5" to reach thirty and a half seconds?

> Copy, snipp8ing, killing, and zapping a region of a track is done
> natively by wedit rather than relying on soc, since it is perfomred on
> the memory image of the file, not the file itself. Edges produced by

I see.  That is fine, but it raises the issue of what kind of image you 
are working with, and how you handle, huge files.  Sox for example, uses 
32 bit unsigned PCM data for its work, converting in and out of that as 
necessary, meaning that wave files are the best intermediate format if you 
want to avoid transcoding artifacts.

As for huge files: I frequently work with DVD audio rips ("mplayer dvd://1 
-ao pcm:file=blabla.wav"), which can end up being two-six hours of 48K 
stereo audio, which results in wave files between 400MB and a few GB.  
Those are not going to make it into memory on any of my home systems.

I should just RTFM, I know.

Luke

Re: text console tools for audio processing

[Chuck Hallenbeck]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Wedit uses 16 bit signed samples, one or two channels, in memory. So
much of what you need to do is beyond the scope of wedit, I'm afraid. I
have a system with a GB of memory and sometimes run into things I can't
handle too. But most of my work is much less demanding than you
indicated.

So, if wedit can't handle it, there's always the underlying standard
apps to fall back on. But as you know, when sox works on a huge file
you may as well take a nap until it finishes. If you can put your task
in memory, it is instantaneous.

Chuck


On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 03:56:16PM -0400, luke wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Jun 2008, Chuck Hallenbeck wrote:
> 
> > You can identify a point in a file either by percentages, or by
> > minutes:seconds. A number without a colon is interpreted as a percent
> > of the total length, a number with a colon is taken as minutes colon
> > seconds, with the seconds part permitting a decimal point.
> 
> Meaning that I would need "00:30.5" to reach thirty and a half seconds?
> 
> > Copy, snipp8ing, killing, and zapping a region of a track is done
> > natively by wedit rather than relying on soc, since it is perfomred on
> > the memory image of the file, not the file itself. Edges produced by
> 
> I see.  That is fine, but it raises the issue of what kind of image you 
> are working with, and how you handle, huge files.  Sox for example, uses 
> 32 bit unsigned PCM data for its work, converting in and out of that as 
> necessary, meaning that wave files are the best intermediate format if you 
> want to avoid transcoding artifacts.
> 
> As for huge files: I frequently work with DVD audio rips ("mplayer dvd://1 
> -ao pcm:file=blabla.wav"), which can end up being two-six hours of 48K 
> stereo audio, which results in wave files between 400MB and a few GB.  
> Those are not going to make it into memory on any of my home systems.
> 
> I should just RTFM, I know.
> 
> Luke
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

- -- 
The Moon is Waxing Gibbous (97% of Full)

My web site: http://hallenbeck.ftml.net and my cell phone: 1-518-334-9022.
                                --------
 "With us nothing has time to gather meaning, and too many things
are occurring for even a big heart to hold."
- --W. B. Yeats
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkhW4A4ACgkQ0maTgpPXM9czMgCfeFC/9a+vrhSzw/6QWpPLixlh
3AkAn2OXxL6/DpDxd3OkUgvXAZAPQtqp
=4FSZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: text console tools for audio processing

[luke]

On Mon, 16 Jun 2008, Chuck Hallenbeck wrote:

> Wedit uses 16 bit signed samples, one or two channels, in memory. So
> much of what you need to do is beyond the scope of wedit, I'm afraid. I
> have a system with a GB of memory and sometimes run into things I can't
> handle too. But most of my work is much less demanding than you
> indicated.

Got ya.  Still, I can see some uses for it in non-huge jobs.

> So, if wedit can't handle it, there's always the underlying standard
> apps to fall back on. But as you know, when sox works on a huge file
> you may as well take a nap until it finishes. If you can put your task
> in memory, it is instantaneous.

Indeed.  Sox won't always work on files that big (I forget its upper 
limit, but it's somewhere around 2 gig), and I often have to pull files 
off of DVD in pieces of about 2 hour length, just so sox can handle them.  
A pita, that, but what'ya gonna do?

Yes, I have often had to put a long series of pull, edit with sox, flac 
encode, rsync jobs in a nice big && sequence in bash, and then go to bed 
for the evening, so that it could be finished in the morning, and then 
worry about did I screw up one of the title numbers in all that?:)  
Sudoing to root's bash, and running with a niceness of -18 can help to 
speed things along from time to time, if I remember to do it.

Luke

Re: text console tools for audio processing

[Georgina Joyce]

> which plays from 20% to 40% in the file. When I'm snipping unwanted
> sound, I might even go to something as fine as:
> 
> snip 0-0.7892
> 
> Of course, I've first done some play commands that focused me on that
> value.
> 

This sounds great.  Are you saying that it has the capability of editing
as can be achieved by using soundgrab?

Gena
> Janina
> 
> John covici writes:
> > Will wedit do any kind of fast forward/rewind or, better yet, audio on
> > as you page up and down the file?
> > 
> > -- 
> > Your life is like a penny.  You're going to lose it.  The question is:
> > How do
> > you spend it?
> > 
> >          John Covici
> >          covici@ccs.covici.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 
-- 
Gena

http://www.ready2golinux.com

M0EBP

Re: text console tools for audio processing

[Janina Sajka]

Hi, Gina:

Well, I've never used soundgrab so I can't compare. I can tell you I use
wedit to snip unwanted chunks off an audio file, and to splice together
two parts that weren't continguous before. And, the splice/cut point can
be calculated to a very fine point.

hth

Janina

Georgina Joyce writes:
> 
> > which plays from 20% to 40% in the file. When I'm snipping unwanted
> > sound, I might even go to something as fine as:
> > 
> > snip 0-0.7892
> > 
> > Of course, I've first done some play commands that focused me on that
> > value.
> > 
> 
> This sounds great.  Are you saying that it has the capability of editing
> as can be achieved by using soundgrab?
> 
> Gena
> > Janina
> > 
> > John covici writes:
> > > Will wedit do any kind of fast forward/rewind or, better yet, audio on
> > > as you page up and down the file?
> > > 
> > > -- 
> > > Your life is like a penny.  You're going to lose it.  The question is:
> > > How do
> > > you spend it?
> > > 
> > >          John Covici
> > >          covici@ccs.covici.com
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > 
> -- 
> Gena
> 
> http://www.ready2golinux.com
> 
> M0EBP
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 

Janina Sajka,	Phone:	+1.202.595.7777;	sip:janina@a11y.org
Partner, Capital Accessibility LLC	http://CapitalAccessibility.Com

Marketing the Owasys 22C talking screenless cell phone in the U.S. and Canada
Learn more at http://ScreenlessPhone.Com

Chair, Open Accessibility	janina@a11y.org	
Linux Foundation		http://a11y.org

Re: text console tools for audio processing

[John covici]

on Monday 06/16/2008 luke(speakup@lists.tacticus.com) wrote
 > On Mon, 16 Jun 2008, John covici wrote:
 > 
 > > Will wedit do any kind of fast forward/rewind or, better yet, audio on
 > > as you page up and down the file?
 > 
 > What do you mean by this "audio on as you page up and down the file" part?
 > 
 > Luke

-- 
Your life is like a penny.  You're going to lose it.  The question is:
How do
you spend it?

         John Covici
         covici@ccs.covici.com

Re: text console tools for audio processing

[John covici]

I mean something like -- you are playing a file and you hit pgdn and
the file moves forward and the audio is still going.  Very nice to
have such a thing.

on Monday 06/16/2008 luke(speakup@lists.tacticus.com) wrote
 > On Mon, 16 Jun 2008, John covici wrote:
 > 
 > > Will wedit do any kind of fast forward/rewind or, better yet, audio on
 > > as you page up and down the file?
 > 
 > What do you mean by this "audio on as you page up and down the file" part?
 > 
 > Luke

-- 
Your life is like a penny.  You're going to lose it.  The question is:
How do
you spend it?

         John Covici
         covici@ccs.covici.com

Re: text console tools for audio processing

[Chuck Hallenbeck]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

John,

On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 04:43:16PM -0400, John covici wrote:
> I mean something like -- you are playing a file and you hit pgdn and
> the file moves forward and the audio is still going.  Very nice to
> have such a thing.
> 

Actually, on the wedit 2nd level we now have the navigation keys that
zinf used. They are b and f to go back and forward six seconds, capital
B and capital F to go back and forward by sixty seconds, and j and
capital J to go forward or backward by 600 seconds. Not perfect, but a
beginning at navigating. 

Chuck



- -- 
The Moon is Waxing Gibbous (97% of Full)

My web site: http://hallenbeck.ftml.net and my cell phone: 1-518-334-9022.
                                --------
 "With us nothing has time to gather meaning, and too many things
are occurring for even a big heart to hold."
- --W. B. Yeats
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkhW4UAACgkQ0maTgpPXM9fjyACghU29YuIgadk/3jH1wdqaw2f4
9w0AoKq2snP/+tbPmagBdKuIB32uPQZi
=HIhX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: text console tools for audio processing

[John covici]

Can you do that while still playing the file -- and if so, does what
you hear correspond to where you are?

on Monday 06/16/2008 Chuck Hallenbeck(chuckh@ftml.net) wrote
 > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
 > Hash: SHA1
 > 
 > John,
 > 
 > On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 04:43:16PM -0400, John covici wrote:
 > > I mean something like -- you are playing a file and you hit pgdn and
 > > the file moves forward and the audio is still going.  Very nice to
 > > have such a thing.
 > > 
 > 
 > Actually, on the wedit 2nd level we now have the navigation keys that
 > zinf used. They are b and f to go back and forward six seconds, capital
 > B and capital F to go back and forward by sixty seconds, and j and
 > capital J to go forward or backward by 600 seconds. Not perfect, but a
 > beginning at navigating. 
 > 
 > Chuck
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > - -- 
 > The Moon is Waxing Gibbous (97% of Full)
 > 
 > My web site: http://hallenbeck.ftml.net and my cell phone: 1-518-334-9022.
 >                                 --------
 >  "With us nothing has time to gather meaning, and too many things
 > are occurring for even a big heart to hold."
 > - --W. B. Yeats
 > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
 > Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
 > 
 > iEYEARECAAYFAkhW4UAACgkQ0maTgpPXM9fjyACghU29YuIgadk/3jH1wdqaw2f4
 > 9w0AoKq2snP/+tbPmagBdKuIB32uPQZi
 > =HIhX
 > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
 > _______________________________________________
 > Speakup mailing list
 > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
 > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 
Your life is like a penny.  You're going to lose it.  The question is:
How do
you spend it?

         John Covici
         covici@ccs.covici.com

duo boot systems...revisited, i think?

[Karen Lewellen]

sigh,
Just when I think I have a reasonable mind and the door to the hard ware, 
I have to start all over again.
I thought there was a discussion once about the need for a duo boot 
system, but I cannot find this.
pros cons, really needful?
My goal remains for a number of reasons, a system with two separate drives, 
I know I need not do this, but  just call me paranoid grin.
for the foreseeable future, dos will remain my primary os, with the Linux 
distro I use  on the second drive.
I am building a different machine that will be a stand alone Linux server 
box,  with some extras given the results of additional research.
Sorry is this is a newbie question, but  after reading that the *official* 
stock of Debian does not support speakup,...I am behind on reading the 
rest of that thread, I am being more careful than ever.
Thanks,
Karen

duo boot systems...revisited, i think?

[John covici]

So what is your question -- you certainly can have dual boot systems,
either on two different drives or different partitions on the same
drive.

on Thursday 07/17/2008 Karen Lewellen(klewellen@shellworld.net) wrote
 > sigh,
 > Just when I think I have a reasonable mind and the door to the hard ware, 
 > I have to start all over again.
 > I thought there was a discussion once about the need for a duo boot 
 > system, but I cannot find this.
 > pros cons, really needful?
 > My goal remains for a number of reasons, a system with two separate drives, 
 > I know I need not do this, but  just call me paranoid grin.
 > for the foreseeable future, dos will remain my primary os, with the Linux 
 > distro I use  on the second drive.
 > I am building a different machine that will be a stand alone Linux server 
 > box,  with some extras given the results of additional research.
 > Sorry is this is a newbie question, but  after reading that the *official* 
 > stock of Debian does not support speakup,...I am behind on reading the 
 > rest of that thread, I am being more careful than ever.
 > Thanks,
 > Karen
 > 
 > _______________________________________________
 > Speakup mailing list
 > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
 > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 
Your life is like a penny.  You're going to lose it.  The question is:
How do
you spend it?

         John Covici
         covici@ccs.covici.com

Re: duo boot systems...revisited, i think?

[John G. Heim]

I would recommend setting up a virtual machine instead of a dual boot 
system. The difference is that with a dual boot system, you boot into either 
linux or windows. With a virtual machine, either the linux or windows 
operating system runs as a virtual machine in the other operating system. 
But you don't have to reboot to get to the other operating system. I've 
found that the only time I use the "other" operating system on my dual boot 
machines is for testing purposes.  For instance, I'm typing this message on 
a machine that's dual boot but I haven't booted it into linux for months. 
Really since I set it up. Most often what I do is boot my old dual boot 
machine into linux and use that.




----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Karen Lewellen" <klewellen@shellworld.net>
Cc: "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 12:02 AM
Subject: duo boot systems...revisited, i think?


> sigh,
> Just when I think I have a reasonable mind and the door to the hard ware, 
> I have to start all over again.
> I thought there was a discussion once about the need for a duo boot 
> system, but I cannot find this.
> pros cons, really needful?
> My goal remains for a number of reasons, a system with two separate 
> drives, I know I need not do this, but  just call me paranoid grin.
> for the foreseeable future, dos will remain my primary os, with the Linux 
> distro I use  on the second drive.
> I am building a different machine that will be a stand alone Linux server 
> box,  with some extras given the results of additional research.
> Sorry is this is a newbie question, but  after reading that the *official* 
> stock of Debian does not support speakup,...I am behind on reading the 
> rest of that thread, I am being more careful than ever.
> Thanks,
> Karen
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
> 

Re: duo boot systems...revisited, i think?

[Karen Lewellen]

Thanks for the tip.
Not running windows, but will hunt virtual options for DOs.
now that I think of it though, a reboot is no major factor, any way to 
create a . bat file run in dos that will reboot the system into Linux as 
needed into Linux without requiring the duo processor?
I have been dragging out this business long enough, but hardware and talent 
has been the issue.  I do not want yet another hardware factor because I 
have to find a duo processor.
Thanks,
Karen


On Thu, 17 Jul 2008, John G. Heim wrote:

> I would recommend setting up a virtual machine instead of a dual boot system. 
> The difference is that with a dual boot system, you boot into either linux or 
> windows. With a virtual machine, either the linux or windows operating system 
> runs as a virtual machine in the other operating system. But you don't have 
> to reboot to get to the other operating system. I've found that the only time 
> I use the "other" operating system on my dual boot machines is for testing 
> purposes.  For instance, I'm typing this message on a machine that's dual 
> boot but I haven't booted it into linux for months. Really since I set it up. 
> Most often what I do is boot my old dual boot machine into linux and use 
> that.
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Karen Lewellen" 
> <klewellen@shellworld.net>
> Cc: "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 12:02 AM
> Subject: duo boot systems...revisited, i think?
>
>
>>  sigh,
>>  Just when I think I have a reasonable mind and the door to the hard ware,
>>  I have to start all over again.
>>  I thought there was a discussion once about the need for a duo boot
>>  system, but I cannot find this.
>>  pros cons, really needful?
>>  My goal remains for a number of reasons, a system with two separate
>>  drives, I know I need not do this, but  just call me paranoid grin.
>>  for the foreseeable future, dos will remain my primary os, with the Linux
>>  distro I use  on the second drive.
>>  I am building a different machine that will be a stand alone Linux server
>>  box,  with some extras given the results of additional research.
>>  Sorry is this is a newbie question, but  after reading that the *official*
>>  stock of Debian does not support speakup,...I am behind on reading the
>>  rest of that thread, I am being more careful than ever.
>>  Thanks,
>>  Karen
>>
>>  _______________________________________________
>>  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: duo boot systems...revisited, i think?

[Kristoffer Gustafsson]

Hello!
There is a dos program called loadlin that you can use if you want to reboot 
into linux from dos.
I've used this a lot some years ago. just don't install grub when you 
install linux, and you'll be fine.
Oh, and don't forget to copy the vmlinuz kernel file, and the initrd ramdisk 
somewhere on the dos partition you'll need this when using loadlin.
/Kristoffer
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Karen Lewellen" <klewellen@shellworld.net>
To: "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 7:39 PM
Subject: Re: duo boot systems...revisited, i think?


> Thanks for the tip.
> Not running windows, but will hunt virtual options for DOs.
> now that I think of it though, a reboot is no major factor, any way to 
> create a . bat file run in dos that will reboot the system into Linux as 
> needed into Linux without requiring the duo processor?
> I have been dragging out this business long enough, but hardware and 
> talent has been the issue.  I do not want yet another hardware factor 
> because I have to find a duo processor.
> Thanks,
> Karen
>
>
> On Thu, 17 Jul 2008, John G. Heim wrote:
>
>> I would recommend setting up a virtual machine instead of a dual boot 
>> system. The difference is that with a dual boot system, you boot into 
>> either linux or windows. With a virtual machine, either the linux or 
>> windows operating system runs as a virtual machine in the other operating 
>> system. But you don't have to reboot to get to the other operating 
>> system. I've found that the only time I use the "other" operating system 
>> on my dual boot machines is for testing purposes.  For instance, I'm 
>> typing this message on a machine that's dual boot but I haven't booted it 
>> into linux for months. Really since I set it up. Most often what I do is 
>> boot my old dual boot machine into linux and use that.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Karen Lewellen" 
>> <klewellen@shellworld.net>
>> Cc: "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." 
>> <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
>> Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 12:02 AM
>> Subject: duo boot systems...revisited, i think?
>>
>>
>>>  sigh,
>>>  Just when I think I have a reasonable mind and the door to the hard 
>>> ware,
>>>  I have to start all over again.
>>>  I thought there was a discussion once about the need for a duo boot
>>>  system, but I cannot find this.
>>>  pros cons, really needful?
>>>  My goal remains for a number of reasons, a system with two separate
>>>  drives, I know I need not do this, but  just call me paranoid grin.
>>>  for the foreseeable future, dos will remain my primary os, with the 
>>> Linux
>>>  distro I use  on the second drive.
>>>  I am building a different machine that will be a stand alone Linux 
>>> server
>>>  box,  with some extras given the results of additional research.
>>>  Sorry is this is a newbie question, but  after reading that the 
>>> *official*
>>>  stock of Debian does not support speakup,...I am behind on reading the
>>>  rest of that thread, I am being more careful than ever.
>>>  Thanks,
>>>  Karen
>>>
>>>  _______________________________________________
>>>  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: duo boot systems...revisited, i think?

[luke]

On Thu, 17 Jul 2008, Karen Lewellen wrote:

> Not running windows, but will hunt virtual options for DOs.

There are no virtual options for DOS, at least not for running virtuals 
under DOS.  A virtual machine is one operating system which runs in an 
emulated hardware environment under another operating system.  Linux and 
Windows can run virtual  DOS machines, but DOS can not run virtual 
anythings.

Now, for DOS under Linux, DOSEmu is probably a better solution than 
virtualization.

> now that I think of it though, a reboot is no major factor, any way to create
> a . bat file run in dos that will reboot the system into Linux as needed into
> Linux without requiring the duo processor?

What do you mean by "duo processor"?  If you are talking about multiple 
core processors, those have nothing to do with duel boot (duel not duo).

Duel boot, is when you can boot into one of many operating systems which 
are installed on your machine, usually in separate hard drive partitions, 
or on separate hard drives.  That has no connection what ever, either to 
multiple processors, multiple cored processors, or duo anythings.

> I have been dragging out this business long enough, but hardware and talent
> has been the issue.  I do not want yet another hardware factor because I have
> to find a duo processor.

Again, what is this "duo" processor, and why do you need it?

Luke

Re: duo boot systems...revisited, i think?

[Karen Lewellen]

I am sorry that my spelling is such an issue for you.
As expressed I wrote that post in the middle of the night.
Not shared however is that I learned that my 20 year old nephew died of a 
heart attack in America, and i was more than  a bit  distracted.
Others seemed to understand my meaning,
Indeed my goal is to run DOS and Linux on different hard drives, and boot 
into Linux as needed.
Is that clear enough for you?


On Sat, 19 Jul 2008, luke wrote:

> On Thu, 17 Jul 2008, Karen Lewellen wrote:
>
>> Not running windows, but will hunt virtual options for DOs.
>
> There are no virtual options for DOS, at least not for running virtuals
> under DOS.  A virtual machine is one operating system which runs in an
> emulated hardware environment under another operating system.  Linux and
> Windows can run virtual  DOS machines, but DOS can not run virtual
> anythings.
>
> Now, for DOS under Linux, DOSEmu is probably a better solution than
> virtualization.
>
>> now that I think of it though, a reboot is no major factor, any way to create
>> a . bat file run in dos that will reboot the system into Linux as needed into
>> Linux without requiring the duo processor?
>
> What do you mean by "duo processor"?  If you are talking about multiple
> core processors, those have nothing to do with duel boot (duel not duo).
>
> Duel boot, is when you can boot into one of many operating systems which
> are installed on your machine, usually in separate hard drive partitions,
> or on separate hard drives.  That has no connection what ever, either to
> multiple processors, multiple cored processors, or duo anythings.
>
>> I have been dragging out this business long enough, but hardware and talent
>> has been the issue.  I do not want yet another hardware factor because I have
>> to find a duo processor.
>
> Again, what is this "duo" processor, and why do you need it?
>
> Luke
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
>

Re: duo boot systems...revisited, i think?

[Kerry Hoath]

Personally I don't care how badly you spell your messages, however there 
seems to be some confusion on the list exactly what you want and what you 
mean. I'll try summarize your options, and see if that makes anything 
clearer to you.

Feel free to write to me off list if it would help.

A dual core processor or core duo or core 2 duo (depending on how new it is) 
is a processer that has 2 cores in it. It is capable of executing 2 tasks at 
once (in theory) and is a handy thing to have when you have a high workload 
on your computer or you are virtualizing see below.

Obviously a dual boot system is a system that can boot into Linux or Dos.
Usually the decision is made at boot time as to which operating system to 
boot; usually with a boot loder of some kind.

Linux boot loaders include grub, lilo and others. You can also put a loader 
in the master boot record which will allow you to hold the alt or shift key 
at boot and pick which partition to boot.

There are also loaders that you can load from dos that can start linux, 
however I am not sure how they handle modern kernels and initial ramdisks.
syslinux and loadlin are two that spring to mind.
An initial ramdisk is a set of files and scripts that are loaded into 
extended memory and control is passed to them by the kernel.
This initial ramdisk is responsible for loading drivers for the root file 
system, key hardware drivers and starting up raid or volume management 
systems.
The boot loader needs to load this file (usually 4-12 megabytes large) into 
extended memory above the kernel and pass control to the Linux kernel.
This blows dos away and gets you running Linux.

Most people use a Linux boot loader to load this up as they tend to work 
better at doing this. These loaders can also boot dos; however it is best to 
keep dos on the first drive, (bios drive 0x80) and Linux either on a 
partition of that drive or on the second disk.

If running 2 operating systems on the one box you have a couple of options 
as you have surmized.
2 disks with an operating system per disk, or 1 disk with multiple 
partitions.

I am over-simplifying here in order to make this understandable however when 
you partition a disk a table in the first sector of the disk tells you how 
much disk is allocated to each operating system.

Think of it as slicing up a cake into different sized pieces, you allocate 
diferent sized pieces depending on how hungry people are.

You put dos on the first partition of a disk (usually) and Linux on one or 
more partitions after this.

Install dos (or Windows 95 dos not sure which one you mean) first,
on a partition that does not take up all the disk, then put Linux on another 
partition or two.

I usually have /boot on a primary partition which contains the boot loader, 
and the rest of Linux in an extended partition, (or in dos terms a set of 
logical drives in the extended partition)

It's up to you how to do things; however this might help clarify or confuse 
things a bit more.

virtualization is a method of running one operating system inside another on 
a computer.
You can run Linux inside a virtual machine inside Linux, or Windows or other 
operating systems.
You can't run anything virtually inside dos because dos does not run in 
protected mode and virtualization is not possible in this environment.

You can run virtual Linux in windows, or virtual windows in Linux.
This allows you to run both operating systems at once; saving you a reboot 
to switch between them.
Linux has a program called dosemu, which when correctly configured allows 
dos to run inside Linux. Quite a lot of stuf runs under it including some 
games and certain screen readers so it is worth a look.

There's nothing I can do under dos that I can't do under Linux, and unless 
you have certain applications like word perfect or similar you might find 
yourself using Linux more than you use dos.
I ended up deleting my install of dos about 6 months after installing Linux 
in 1993.

Regards, Kerry.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Karen Lewellen" <klewellen@shellworld.net>
To: "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Sunday, July 20, 2008 7:41 AM
Subject: Re: duo boot systems...revisited, i think?


I am sorry that my spelling is such an issue for you.
As expressed I wrote that post in the middle of the night.
Not shared however is that I learned that my 20 year old nephew died of a
heart attack in America, and i was more than  a bit  distracted.
Others seemed to understand my meaning,
Indeed my goal is to run DOS and Linux on different hard drives, and boot
into Linux as needed.
Is that clear enough for you?


On Sat, 19 Jul 2008, luke wrote:

> On Thu, 17 Jul 2008, Karen Lewellen wrote:
>
>> Not running windows, but will hunt virtual options for DOs.
>
> There are no virtual options for DOS, at least not for running virtuals
> under DOS.  A virtual machine is one operating system which runs in an
> emulated hardware environment under another operating system.  Linux and
> Windows can run virtual  DOS machines, but DOS can not run virtual
> anythings.
>
> Now, for DOS under Linux, DOSEmu is probably a better solution than
> virtualization.
>
>> now that I think of it though, a reboot is no major factor, any way to 
>> create
>> a . bat file run in dos that will reboot the system into Linux as needed 
>> into
>> Linux without requiring the duo processor?
>
> What do you mean by "duo processor"?  If you are talking about multiple
> core processors, those have nothing to do with duel boot (duel not duo).
>
> Duel boot, is when you can boot into one of many operating systems which
> are installed on your machine, usually in separate hard drive partitions,
> or on separate hard drives.  That has no connection what ever, either to
> multiple processors, multiple cored processors, or duo anythings.
>
>> I have been dragging out this business long enough, but hardware and 
>> talent
>> has been the issue.  I do not want yet another hardware factor because I 
>> have
>> to find a duo processor.
>
> Again, what is this "duo" processor, and why do you need it?
>
> Luke
> _______________________________________________
> 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: duo boot systems...revisited, i think?

[Karen Lewellen]

Hi there,
This is crystal clear, and very helpful.
i will write off list to ask the couple of additional questions I have.
Indeed I use  wordperfect among other DOS programs and have  several years 
of  work invested in them and in my three dos screen readers, not to 
mention tthousands in hardware, so it will 
be a separate drive until I have a reason to do otherwise.
Will ask  my remaining questions off list, and thanks for the clear 
answer,
Karen

On Sun, 20 Jul 2008, Kerry Hoath wrote:

> Personally I don't care how badly you spell your messages, however there
> seems to be some confusion on the list exactly what you want and what you
> mean. I'll try summarize your options, and see if that makes anything
> clearer to you.
>
> Feel free to write to me off list if it would help.
>
> A dual core processor or core duo or core 2 duo (depending on how new it is)
> is a processer that has 2 cores in it. It is capable of executing 2 tasks at
> once (in theory) and is a handy thing to have when you have a high workload
> on your computer or you are virtualizing see below.
>
> Obviously a dual boot system is a system that can boot into Linux or Dos.
> Usually the decision is made at boot time as to which operating system to
> boot; usually with a boot loder of some kind.
>
> Linux boot loaders include grub, lilo and others. You can also put a loader
> in the master boot record which will allow you to hold the alt or shift key
> at boot and pick which partition to boot.
>
> There are also loaders that you can load from dos that can start linux,
> however I am not sure how they handle modern kernels and initial ramdisks.
> syslinux and loadlin are two that spring to mind.
> An initial ramdisk is a set of files and scripts that are loaded into
> extended memory and control is passed to them by the kernel.
> This initial ramdisk is responsible for loading drivers for the root file
> system, key hardware drivers and starting up raid or volume management
> systems.
> The boot loader needs to load this file (usually 4-12 megabytes large) into
> extended memory above the kernel and pass control to the Linux kernel.
> This blows dos away and gets you running Linux.
>
> Most people use a Linux boot loader to load this up as they tend to work
> better at doing this. These loaders can also boot dos; however it is best to
> keep dos on the first drive, (bios drive 0x80) and Linux either on a
> partition of that drive or on the second disk.
>
> If running 2 operating systems on the one box you have a couple of options
> as you have surmized.
> 2 disks with an operating system per disk, or 1 disk with multiple
> partitions.
>
> I am over-simplifying here in order to make this understandable however when
> you partition a disk a table in the first sector of the disk tells you how
> much disk is allocated to each operating system.
>
> Think of it as slicing up a cake into different sized pieces, you allocate
> diferent sized pieces depending on how hungry people are.
>
> You put dos on the first partition of a disk (usually) and Linux on one or
> more partitions after this.
>
> Install dos (or Windows 95 dos not sure which one you mean) first,
> on a partition that does not take up all the disk, then put Linux on another
> partition or two.
>
> I usually have /boot on a primary partition which contains the boot loader,
> and the rest of Linux in an extended partition, (or in dos terms a set of
> logical drives in the extended partition)
>
> It's up to you how to do things; however this might help clarify or confuse
> things a bit more.
>
> virtualization is a method of running one operating system inside another on
> a computer.
> You can run Linux inside a virtual machine inside Linux, or Windows or other
> operating systems.
> You can't run anything virtually inside dos because dos does not run in
> protected mode and virtualization is not possible in this environment.
>
> You can run virtual Linux in windows, or virtual windows in Linux.
> This allows you to run both operating systems at once; saving you a reboot
> to switch between them.
> Linux has a program called dosemu, which when correctly configured allows
> dos to run inside Linux. Quite a lot of stuf runs under it including some
> games and certain screen readers so it is worth a look.
>
> There's nothing I can do under dos that I can't do under Linux, and unless
> you have certain applications like word perfect or similar you might find
> yourself using Linux more than you use dos.
> I ended up deleting my install of dos about 6 months after installing Linux
> in 1993.
>
> Regards, Kerry.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Karen Lewellen" <klewellen@shellworld.net>
> To: "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Sunday, July 20, 2008 7:41 AM
> Subject: Re: duo boot systems...revisited, i think?
>
>
> I am sorry that my spelling is such an issue for you.
> As expressed I wrote that post in the middle of the night.
> Not shared however is that I learned that my 20 year old nephew died of a
> heart attack in America, and i was more than  a bit  distracted.
> Others seemed to understand my meaning,
> Indeed my goal is to run DOS and Linux on different hard drives, and boot
> into Linux as needed.
> Is that clear enough for you?
>
>
> On Sat, 19 Jul 2008, luke wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 17 Jul 2008, Karen Lewellen wrote:
>>
>>> Not running windows, but will hunt virtual options for DOs.
>>
>> There are no virtual options for DOS, at least not for running virtuals
>> under DOS.  A virtual machine is one operating system which runs in an
>> emulated hardware environment under another operating system.  Linux and
>> Windows can run virtual  DOS machines, but DOS can not run virtual
>> anythings.
>>
>> Now, for DOS under Linux, DOSEmu is probably a better solution than
>> virtualization.
>>
>>> now that I think of it though, a reboot is no major factor, any way to
>>> create
>>> a . bat file run in dos that will reboot the system into Linux as needed
>>> into
>>> Linux without requiring the duo processor?
>>
>> What do you mean by "duo processor"?  If you are talking about multiple
>> core processors, those have nothing to do with duel boot (duel not duo).
>>
>> Duel boot, is when you can boot into one of many operating systems which
>> are installed on your machine, usually in separate hard drive partitions,
>> or on separate hard drives.  That has no connection what ever, either to
>> multiple processors, multiple cored processors, or duo anythings.
>>
>>> I have been dragging out this business long enough, but hardware and
>>> talent
>>> has been the issue.  I do not want yet another hardware factor because I
>>> have
>>> to find a duo processor.
>>
>> Again, what is this "duo" processor, and why do you need it?
>>
>> Luke
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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: duo boot systems...revisited, i think?

[luke]

I am sorry to hear that about your nephew.

That said, for what it's worth, I couldn't give a fig about your spelling, 
Karen.
rather than criticizing your spelling, I was attempting to 
clarify your meaning.  You were talking about a "duo processor".  That to 
me suggests a "Core duo  processor", which is an Intel processor which, as 
far as I know, has no connection to this conversation.  It is a "dual 
core" processor, but if you thought that you need a dual core processor to 
setup a dual boot system, then you are mistaken.

I thought that perhaps you were confused in some way, and thought you 
needed a "duo processor" to do "dual booting", which is certainly not 
true.  As such, I thought I would ask you about your meaning, in hopes of 
saving you some money if in fact you had a misimpression that a hardware 
change was needed in order to dual boot.  I was not talking about your 
spelling at all.

If I some how misread your message, and you did not mention a "duo 
processor" as I thought for sure I read in your message, then I apologize 
for bothering you with my less than helpful help.  I will let the others 
who, as you say, had no trouble understanding you, help you in the future.

Regards,

Luke


On Sat, 19 Jul 2008, Karen Lewellen wrote:

> I am sorry that my spelling is such an issue for you.
> As expressed I wrote that post in the middle of the night.
> Not shared however is that I learned that my 20 year old nephew died of a
> heart attack in America, and i was more than  a bit  distracted.
> Others seemed to understand my meaning,
> Indeed my goal is to run DOS and Linux on different hard drives, and boot into
> Linux as needed.
> Is that clear enough for you?
> 
> 
> On Sat, 19 Jul 2008, luke wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 17 Jul 2008, Karen Lewellen wrote:
> > 
> > > Not running windows, but will hunt virtual options for DOs.
> > 
> > There are no virtual options for DOS, at least not for running virtuals
> > under DOS.  A virtual machine is one operating system which runs in an
> > emulated hardware environment under another operating system.  Linux and
> > Windows can run virtual  DOS machines, but DOS can not run virtual
> > anythings.
> > 
> > Now, for DOS under Linux, DOSEmu is probably a better solution than
> > virtualization.
> > 
> > > now that I think of it though, a reboot is no major factor, any way to
> > > create
> > > a . bat file run in dos that will reboot the system into Linux as needed
> > > into
> > > Linux without requiring the duo processor?
> > 
> > What do you mean by "duo processor"?  If you are talking about multiple
> > core processors, those have nothing to do with duel boot (duel not duo).
> > 
> > Duel boot, is when you can boot into one of many operating systems which
> > are installed on your machine, usually in separate hard drive partitions,
> > or on separate hard drives.  That has no connection what ever, either to
> > multiple processors, multiple cored processors, or duo anythings.
> > 
> > > I have been dragging out this business long enough, but hardware and
> > > talent
> > > has been the issue.  I do not want yet another hardware factor because I
> > > have
> > > to find a duo processor.
> > 
> > Again, what is this "duo" processor, and why do you need it?
> > 
> > Luke
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: duo boot systems...revisited, i think?

[Karen Lewellen]

confused, no, stressed yes.
i noted in my first reply that I wrote at an early hour.

It might have been respectful to ask if I were confusing the terms, not 
write  as if I were.
You  simply wrote in what seemed to me to be inconsiderate fashion.
Kerry has  been more helpful and i have the answers I need thanks.


On Sat, 19 Jul 2008, luke wrote:

> I am sorry to hear that about your nephew.
>
> That said, for what it's worth, I couldn't give a fig about your spelling,
> Karen.
> rather than criticizing your spelling, I was attempting to
> clarify your meaning.  You were talking about a "duo processor".  That to
> me suggests a "Core duo  processor", which is an Intel processor which, as
> far as I know, has no connection to this conversation.  It is a "dual
> core" processor, but if you thought that you need a dual core processor to
> setup a dual boot system, then you are mistaken.
>
> I thought that perhaps you were confused in some way, and thought you
> needed a "duo processor" to do "dual booting", which is certainly not
> true.  As such, I thought I would ask you about your meaning, in hopes of
> saving you some money if in fact you had a misimpression that a hardware
> change was needed in order to dual boot.  I was not talking about your
> spelling at all.
>
> If I some how misread your message, and you did not mention a "duo
> processor" as I thought for sure I read in your message, then I apologize
> for bothering you with my less than helpful help.  I will let the others
> who, as you say, had no trouble understanding you, help you in the future.
>
> Regards,
>
> Luke
>
>
> On Sat, 19 Jul 2008, Karen Lewellen wrote:
>
>> I am sorry that my spelling is such an issue for you.
>> As expressed I wrote that post in the middle of the night.
>> Not shared however is that I learned that my 20 year old nephew died of a
>> heart attack in America, and i was more than  a bit  distracted.
>> Others seemed to understand my meaning,
>> Indeed my goal is to run DOS and Linux on different hard drives, and boot into
>> Linux as needed.
>> Is that clear enough for you?
>>
>>
>> On Sat, 19 Jul 2008, luke wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 17 Jul 2008, Karen Lewellen wrote:
>>>
>>>> Not running windows, but will hunt virtual options for DOs.
>>>
>>> There are no virtual options for DOS, at least not for running virtuals
>>> under DOS.  A virtual machine is one operating system which runs in an
>>> emulated hardware environment under another operating system.  Linux and
>>> Windows can run virtual  DOS machines, but DOS can not run virtual
>>> anythings.
>>>
>>> Now, for DOS under Linux, DOSEmu is probably a better solution than
>>> virtualization.
>>>
>>>> now that I think of it though, a reboot is no major factor, any way to
>>>> create
>>>> a . bat file run in dos that will reboot the system into Linux as needed
>>>> into
>>>> Linux without requiring the duo processor?
>>>
>>> What do you mean by "duo processor"?  If you are talking about multiple
>>> core processors, those have nothing to do with duel boot (duel not duo).
>>>
>>> Duel boot, is when you can boot into one of many operating systems which
>>> are installed on your machine, usually in separate hard drive partitions,
>>> or on separate hard drives.  That has no connection what ever, either to
>>> multiple processors, multiple cored processors, or duo anythings.
>>>
>>>> I have been dragging out this business long enough, but hardware and
>>>> talent
>>>> has been the issue.  I do not want yet another hardware factor because I
>>>> have
>>>> to find a duo processor.
>>>
>>> Again, what is this "duo" processor, and why do you need it?
>>>
>>> Luke
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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: text console tools for audio processing

[luke]

(The list software originally blocked this because I had John's address in 
the header along with the list address ("too many recipients" it 
said--really!))

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2008 15:41:18 -0400 (EDT)
From: luke <speakup@lists.tacticus.com>
To: covici@ccs.covici.com,
    Speakup is a screen review system for Linux. <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Subject: Re: text console tools for audio processing

On Mon, 16 Jun 2008, John covici wrote:

> Will wedit do any kind of fast forward/rewind or, better yet, audio on
> as you page up and down the file?

What do you mean by this "audio on as you page up and down the file" part?

Luke