From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by befuddled.reisers.ca (Postfix, from userid 65534) id B59521EF7BC; Wed, 8 Oct 2014 16:26:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail0131.smtp25.com (mail0131.smtp25.com [75.126.84.131]) by befuddled.reisers.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0605A1EF7AF for ; Wed, 8 Oct 2014 16:26:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ccs.covici.com (d-out-001.smtp25.com [67.228.158.174] (may be forged)) by d-out-001.smtp25.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id s98KQ9oZ014116 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Wed, 8 Oct 2014 16:26:09 -0400 Received: from ccs.covici.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ccs.covici.com (8.14.9/8.14.8) with ESMTP id s98KQ9U1021408 for ; Wed, 8 Oct 2014 16:26:09 -0400 To: "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." Subject: Re: the push to get rid of CONFIG_VT in the kernel and the future of Speakup In-reply-to: <54359B9E.10203@verizon.net> References: <87zjd64c16.fsf@mushroom.PK5001Z> <543593E4.5040400@gmail.com> <54359B9E.10203@verizon.net> Comments: In-reply-to Al Sten-Clanton message dated "Wed, 08 Oct 2014 16:16:30 -0400." X-Mailer: MH-E 8.2; nmh 1.3; GNU Emacs 23.4.1 Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2014 16:26:09 -0400 Message-ID: <21407.1412799969@ccs.covici.com> From: covici@ccs.covici.com X-SpamH-OriginatingIP: 70.109.53.110 X-SpamH-Filter: d-out-001.smtp25.com-s98KQ9oZ014116 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 X-BeenThere: speakup@linux-speakup.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 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: Wed, 08 Oct 2014 20:26:16 -0000 That is what I think as well -- and most motherboards do have serial ports, just the headers are not brought out to the back. Al Sten-Clanton wrote: > My knowledge of this business is minimal, but I thought that one > advantage of the current approach, if you can use a hardware speech > synthesizer, is that you can get at least some of the boot-up > messages--not as early as sighted folks get them, but well before > software speech can kick in. If this is true, wouldn't the proposed > change be a very builty-in reduction in non-visual access? > > Al > > On 10/08/2014 03:43 PM, Kyle wrote: > > It does appear to me that something like this will force more of Speakup > > into userspace. However, unlike others, I'm not entirely opposed to the > > idea of Speakup leaving the kernel, and I think it can only be a good > > thing, especially on newer machines, where dedicated serial ports are > > all but obsolete, and software in userspace can take better advantage of > > things like Pulseaudio and libusb, meaning more extensive software and > > hardware speech support. For example, there would no longer be a need > > for kernel modules to control speech synthesizers, and there would no > > longer be a need to have external userspace connectors such as Espeakup, > > as the entire Speakup screen reader could be moved into userspace, and > > anything that interfaces with a speech synthesizer could be either > > internal or could be a library that interfaces with a speech API like > > speech-dispatcher or others. Even better, if Speakup is moved entirely > > into userspace, it could give rise to far better access to consoles on > > *BSD and other Unix operating systems, as the code could be far more > > portable between operating systems when it doesn't have to be tied into > > a specific kernel. Just my $0.02 BSD. That's Bahamian dollars lol. > > ~Kyle > > http://kyle.tk/ > > > _______________________________________________ > Speakup mailing list > Speakup@linux-speakup.org > http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/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