From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by befuddled.reisers.ca (Postfix, from userid 65534) id 37D871EFCEC; Mon, 19 Dec 2016 20:08:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from hera.aquilenet.fr (hera.aquilenet.fr [IPv6:2a01:474::1]) by befuddled.reisers.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id D40B91EFCBB for ; Mon, 19 Dec 2016 20:08:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hera.aquilenet.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0C7AB2B8; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 02:08:37 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at aquilenet.fr Received: from hera.aquilenet.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (hera.aquilenet.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id J1LHN81P7l4c; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 02:08:37 +0100 (CET) Received: from var.youpi.perso.aquilenet.fr (unknown [IPv6:2a01:cb19:181:c200:3602:86ff:fe2c:6a19]) by hera.aquilenet.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 593E51CB; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 02:08:37 +0100 (CET) Received: from samy by var.youpi.perso.aquilenet.fr with local (Exim 4.88) (envelope-from ) id 1cJ8uy-0003Mo-Of; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 02:08:36 +0100 Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2016 02:08:36 +0100 From: Samuel Thibault To: Okash Khawaja Cc: "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." Subject: Re: Line discipline Message-ID: <20161220010836.GN2895@var.home> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21+34 (58baf7c9f32f) (2010-12-30) X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 X-BeenThere: speakup@linux-speakup.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2016 01:08:42 -0000 Okash Khawaja, on Sun 18 Dec 2016 11:24:11 +0000, wrote: > Now I see three items to address, listed below in no particular order. > > 1. Supplying major and minor dev numbers, instead of hardcoding. This could be a mere module parameter string that a function turns into major/minor. Not a big deal :) > 2. Integrating the changes into speakup_dummy and testing it. Yep! > 3. Strategy for kernel patch. Do we try to have it accepted? Not sure if there > is a standard way of addressing it. It will never be accepted before step 2. is done. In the end we'll want to get it accepted, sure, but we have to make speakup able to use it first, otherwise the kernel patch will be rejected. Thanks! Samuel