On Sat, 1 Mar 2003, Luke Davis wrote: > On Sat, 1 Mar 2003, Kirk Reiser wrote: <snip> > > What I mean is the fewer things you can do in kernel code the better. > > I will leave this here, as the cardinal rule of design. I am one of those > who believes speakup probably shouldn't be in the kernel to begin with, > but I do not trust my abilities even a fraction enough to tackle that > perceived problem, and I am wavering ever so slightly as to whether it is, > in fact, a problem. Still, the above statement has the ring of moral > authority with me, so worry not. I assume, then, you're going to write a bios chip, for the same cost as any other, that has speech onboard, so we don't need Speakup to be in the kernel? (grin) Good luck mate, I look forward to it. -- Toby Fisher Email: toby at tjfisher.co.uk Tel.: +44(0)1480 417272 Mobile: +44(0)7974 363239 ICQ: #61744808 Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
