need comments

need comments

[Kirk Reiser]

Hi again folks:  The current way that I do probing for synths is
reliable sometimes and with some synths.  I have been trying to decide
how I could make it more reliable more often.  The reason we have
these probing problems is because many of the synths are not designed
to interact with the system controlling them.  They are designed to
take data and commands and just execute them.  What I have been toying
with doing is just cycle through the ports checking to see if I have
CTS and if so, saying okay, I got it.

My question to you all is do you think this is an acceptable way of
going about it?  It would mean that a person with a serial synth would
need to have it on the lowest serial port to have it found reliably.
I would be interested in your opinions.  If you don't like the idea,
then I would like a workable suggestion for how to make it work.  I am
not interested in criticism without an alternative solution.

  Kirk

Re: need comments

[Kirk Reiser]

You would still be able to use the speakup_ser=n option if you didn't
want it to probe or if you have something silly like a mouse on ttyS0
or something.

  Kirk

-- 

Kirk Reiser				The Computer Braille Facility
e-mail: kirk@braille.uwo.ca		University of Western Ontario
phone: (519) 661-3061

Re: need comments

[Buddy Brannan]

*Heh* I still like trying to determine what it isn't (I.E. send an at
command to the serial ports and eliminate the ones that return "OK" like
they're modems...heh)

--
Buddy Brannan, KB5ELV
Email: davros@ycardz.com
Voice mail: 877-791-5298
All opinions are all mine!

Re: need comments

[cpt.kirk]

Kirk,

I don't know if this is a workable idea or not. What if it probed like it
does now. If it finds something definative it goes no further, but if it
does not find something definative, it guesses at ports based on the CTS
line status. I apologize if this isn't feasable.

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

Your fly might be open (but don't check it just now).

Re: need comments

[Whistler]

I like this as long as we know we could adjust our speech till we get
things working I mean if we realy must have something on our lower serial
ports we can put it on later after all the set up is done.

Of corse you could run the check for those sound cards that do reply first
and then if that don't work grab the first serial device and say your
mine.

ken

On Tue, 28 Mar 2000, Kirk Reiser wrote:

> Hi again folks:  The current way that I do probing for synths is
> reliable sometimes and with some synths.  I have been trying to decide
> how I could make it more reliable more often.  The reason we have
> these probing problems is because many of the synths are not designed
> to interact with the system controlling them.  They are designed to
> take data and commands and just execute them.  What I have been toying
> with doing is just cycle through the ports checking to see if I have
> CTS and if so, saying okay, I got it.
> 
> My question to you all is do you think this is an acceptable way of
> going about it?  It would mean that a person with a serial synth would
> need to have it on the lowest serial port to have it found reliably.
> I would be interested in your opinions.  If you don't like the idea,
> then I would like a workable suggestion for how to make it work.  I am
> not interested in criticism without an alternative solution.
> 
>   Kirk
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 

Re: need comments

[Whistler]

Nod true but don't you want to auto mate it?  What I mean is it would be
nice if it found the ones that it could find before going for the first
found CTS,.

Ken

On 28 Mar 2000, Kirk Reiser wrote:

> You would still be able to use the speakup_ser=n option if you didn't
> want it to probe or if you have something silly like a mouse on ttyS0
> or something.
> 
>   Kirk
> 
> -- 
> 
> Kirk Reiser				The Computer Braille Facility
> e-mail: kirk@braille.uwo.ca		University of Western Ontario
> phone: (519) 661-3061
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 

Re: need comments

[Christopher Moore]

Kirk,
On my machine, I have  a Braille device on /dev/ttyS0 which would confuse
your scheme of looking for the first cts.
Is there a way to pass the synthesizer/port info to the kernel?  If so,
this approach would simplify things from the user's perspective.  Now, if
you want to changes synthesizers, you need to recompile your kernel.  If
parms could be passed to the kernel, this would be unnecessary.
Chris

w1gm@sdf.lonestar.org
SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.lonestar.org

Re: need comments

[Kirk Reiser]

Christopher Moore <w1gm@sdf.lonestar.org> writes:

> On my machine, I have  a Braille device on /dev/ttyS0 which would confuse
> your scheme of looking for the first cts.
> Is there a way to pass the synthesizer/port info to the kernel?  If so,

I think I mentioned that in my original or a subsequent message.  Even
currently you can tell speakup where your synth is with the
speakup_ser=n option on the kernel command line.  N is any number
between 0 and three depending on how many serial ports you have
installed.

> this approach would simplify things from the user's perspective.  Now, if
> you want to changes synthesizers, you need to recompile your kernel.  If
> parms could be passed to the kernel, this would be unnecessary.

I wish it were this simple.  But! if you're volunteering to help... No problem!

  Kirk 

-- 

Kirk Reiser				The Computer Braille Facility
e-mail: kirk@braille.uwo.ca		University of Western Ontario
phone: (519) 661-3061