From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dukecmmtar01.coxmail.com (dukecmmtar01.coxmail.com [68.99.120.48]) by speech.braille.uwo.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BD6810BB9 for ; Mon, 29 Sep 2008 05:52:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [192.168.0.29] (really [70.166.17.50]) by dukecmmtar01.coxmail.com (InterMail vM.6.01.06.05 201-2131-130-106-20070212) with ESMTP id <20080929095228.VWNJ11753.dukecmmtar01.coxmail.com@[192.168.0.29]> for ; Mon, 29 Sep 2008 05:52:28 -0400 Message-ID: <48E0A559.2030300@baechler.net> Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 02:52:25 -0700 From: Tony Baechler User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." Subject: Re: Speakup_dectlk module under 2.6.26-1-686 on Debian Sid References: <20080927203727.GA23421@localhost.localdomain> <48DF5D0F.7010900@baechler.net> <20080928185122.GA8857@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <20080928185122.GA8857@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: speakup@braille.uwo.ca X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." List-Id: "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 09:52:05 -0000 Gregory Nowak wrote: I wrote: >> I >> had no problem with getting speech to work, but there was definitely >> sluggish behavior when using the screen review keys. I'm guessing that >> there was a delay of about a second from when I hit a key to when I got >> speech. I don't have that problem with Debian using various kernels on >> different machines. >> > > I would like to add that it's not just Speakup keys, it's all speech. If I just hit Enter with no command, there is still the same delay before I hear the prompt repeated. Also, one very annoying thing that zsh does is repeat the first key back to me, so "ls" becomes "lls" etc. I don't recall a delay with key echo but I didn't spend a lot of time with it. > Hmmm, ok, guess it's a sysresccd bug in that case then. Yes, the > report we have matches what you describe. The report we have states > however that everything is fine, until shortly after entering runlevel > 3, which is when the sluggish behavior starts, but those are all the > details we have, and we'd need to know exactly when after entering > runlevel 3 this starts to happen, so we can try to figure out what is > causing the problem. Would you be willing to help debug this? > > OK but how? The Speakup info page tells me to use quiet=1 because speech starts before keyboard support. Therefore, by the time I hit a key and hear speech, it's well into the boot process. I could turn off quiet mode but I understand speech won't shut up until some time later when keyboard support is activated. That's why I can't be more clear on where the problem starts, I was following the instructions on the info page. > Ok, I tested with a doubletalk pc, and a bns, and didn't see this > issue with either synth under 1.1.0, and the 1.1.1 betas. Looks like > the problem is with more synths than just the dectalk in that case, > but I certainly haven't been able to reproduce it here with the > hardware I have to work with. Do you mind if I add the info you > provided to the speakup-info page, so we have a wider documentation of > the issue? > OK, my apologies. I got my CDs mixed up. I haven't tried the System Rescue CD with the Doubletalk LT. That was the grml CD that had a slight delay but I think that's in the Doubletalk firmware. I forgot that I hadn't tried the rescue CD. I can try it if it would help. Also, not that it matters, but the machine with my DEC Express only has 256 MB of RAM and is a fairly slow processor. I don't have a problem on the same machine with the same synth in Debian or grml though. I have no objection to putting my posts on other web sites etc. I do appreciate being told though, so thanks for asking. In regards to licensing, I prefer the BSD license but I'm not going to make an issue about it. I'm not planning on enforcing any legal rights regarding my posts anyway since they're already in a public archive. I realize that I'm far from perfect and want people to have the right to correct my mistakes if they have better or more correct information. Again, thanks for asking first.