OK, I should put in a word here -- in the latest speakup and I am not sure about how Debian implements this, the kernel is not actually patched unless you want to be able to use menuconfig to control what is built in or not -- it just compiles the modules and you load the ones you want. Kernel source is no longer touched at all. Hope this helps. on Saturday 07/26/2008 Gaijin(gaijin at clearwire.net) wrote > On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 11:23:51PM -0700, Gregory Nowak wrote: > > I think you didn't read my question carefully enough. > > I replied to what I quoted from your previous post. I'm > old-school and prefer a simple tarball over any of the other "supposed" > shortcut utilities to help patch the kernel, like git and > module-assistant, the latter who's use never seems to be mentioned when > patching SpeakUP into a kernel. I'm just saying that you could compile > a 2.6.26 kernel on a Commodore-64 if the compiler is correct, as it just > translates sourcecode into bits and bytes the CPU understands. I'm > assuming from what I've gathered that git just downloads the SpeakUP > code, though I've never gotten it to work, and running the patch script > that comes with SpeakUP is what patches the kernel. Others can correct > me if I'm wrong. I'm not sure why module-assistant was added for Debian > and seems like just another complication tossed into the process, so I'm > looking for a different distro that doesn't depend on 5 million lines of > perl script just to keep it working. Debian already has 7 (that I know > of) interfaces into the package manager alone, each with extensive > documentation. > > Michael > > _______________________________________________ > Speakup mailing list > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/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 at ccs.covici.com
