Oops... Twenty five years ago, I wrote unix device drivers for a living, not linux. I don't believe linux existed 25 years ago. I worked for a company called Merge Technologies (www.merge.com) writing drivers for medical imaging equipment. Ironic, isn't it? A blind guy writing imaging device drivers. But that stuff takes a lot of math and I have a BS in math. ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Heim" <jheim@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> To: <tyler at tysdomain.com>; "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." <speakup at braille.uwo.ca> Sent: Friday, February 17, 2012 12:35 PM Subject: Re: still more on bug >I think all you would need to do is write a device driver -- which is a >little like saying all you need to do is build a big enough rocket and you >can go to the moon. How's that joke go? How do you teach an elephant to >dance the bossinova?first you teach him to samba and from there its easy. > > Anyway, 25 years ago, I wrote linux device drivers for a living. But I > haven't written a line of C in anger for 15 years. Not unless you count > commenting out that line in the speakup synth.c program to get past the > bug that started all this. > > I intend to try to find a solution for that bug. I don't want to step on > anybody's toes but I figure the current developers won't mind if I take a > look at that. But you can't barge into an open source project and just > take over. For all we know, there may be top men working on it right now. > There's no point in duplicating effort. But I know no one is working on > the bug I have been talking about because I've already asked. At one time, > I'd have felt pretty qualified to take this on. Right now, I feel my best > qualifications are that I'm still breathing and willing to give it a try. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Littlefield, Tyler" <tyler at tysdomain.com> > To: "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." > <speakup at braille.uwo.ca> > Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 6:13 PM > Subject: Re: still more on bug > > >>I think the responses you were refering to can be discarded and ignored. >>The "shitmachine" comment as well as many others didn't do much to bolster >>the poster's comments, and there wasn't much in the way of fact. Either >>way, I think that said poster was speaking for a very small minority, as a >>lot of people would like to see Speakup get more support. >> >> If I were a kernel guru, or had some way to hopping on that path to >> enlightenment, I'd be more than willing to help out since I already know >> c. I'm also lacking a USB synth, so that's another problem. >> From what I understand though, the USB subsystem would have to be enabled >> for a USB synth to work. There's a lot more behind USB than serial; I >> know this much from my work I've done on a toy operating system I've been >> building. The external serial cards are also an issue, unless you can get >> one that would fit in the internal PCI slot--that I am unsure of. PCMCIA >> for example though is yet another system that has to be enabled. This is >> still doable, but you're going to miss out on earlier boot messages. >> >> Something I've found of interest, though it requires another system to >> catching boot messages is there is a networking boot setup in the kernel. >> I'm not really sure "networking boot" accurately describes it, but here >> are the docs: >> http://www.mjmwired.net/kernel/Documentation/networking/netconsole.txt >> >> Something else worth looking into, and I'm not really sure if it was >> mentioned in this thread but it was for sure mentioned before is Speakup >> in user space. I'd be 100% willing to at least help with something like >> that, but I remember from previous conversations that there are reasons >> why Speakup is in kernel space--the TTY access being one of them. How >> possible would it be to promote speakup to User space (yeah, I guess that >> would get rid of boot messages, but netconsole is always there), and then >> just leave a thin layer behind in kernel space to provide the access to >> the kernel that we need? From what I understand from the bit I've done, >> there exists three points to access drivers from user space: >> - System calls, (though it's probably prefered that these are not used, >> since installing a system call would require that you know what number it >> would be. If something else were to install a syscall before you, you >> couldn't have a constant number). >> - The proc FS, which Speakup already uses to get and set information. >> - A device in /dev. >> >> Could the TTY (and other access) be given through one of these so that >> the user-space speakup could gather the information it needed? What are >> the security implications of something like this? You obviously wouldn't >> want to just allow raw TTY access, so I'm not sure if there would be a >> way to limit this somehow. >> >> Just my two cents and ramblings. Like I said, if there was any way to >> make this work out, I'd love to help out with it. I just don't think I >> know enough about kernel programming to hop in the trenches and start >> fixing the bugs. Both because I don't know much about kernel programming, >> and from what I understand there is need for USB support and work for >> speakup running on systems with more than one processor, neither of which >> I have. >> >> On 2/16/2012 3:45 PM, Albert Sten-Clanton wrote: >>> John, though the typing in my message below yours here was utterly lousy >>> (too many beers), such criticisms as I made were not directed towards >>> you, >>> and I said as much there and in a later message. Those concerning the >>> acceptance of software speech were in fact aimed at earlier comments >>> from >>> somebody else. >>> >>> I most certainly and indisputably did not accuse you of saying that >>> blind >>> people would have to build their own machines in order to get serial >>> ports: >>> nothing you said gave any basis for such an assertion on my part, so I >>> never >>> made it. (Indeed, I had noted earlier yesterday that >>> >>> <www.pcsforeveruyone.com> >>> >>> May actually offer serial ports.) >>> >>> Furthermore, you are among the people to whom I recall expressing >>> gratitude >>> yesterday for replying positively to my question whether a blind person >>> could build a machine. I must apologize if I wrote badly, but I >>> reiterate >>> that I was not criticizing anything you said, and did not even address a >>> couple of things you mention here. >>> >>> In sjhort, I have found your recent messages here concerning Speakup, >>> serial >>> ports, and related matters helpful. My concern here is that support for >>> hardware speech may become difficult to get down the road, maybe even >>> impossible for somebody not well-versed in kernel matters, and my >>> impression >>> is that you may share this concern at least to some degree. >>> >>> Maybe using a reply to one of your messages was a bad idea; if so, for >>> that >>> I apologize. It was the vehicle I had, and, as I said above, I tried to >>> be >>> clear that your comments were not the reason for my expressed concerns. >>> >>> Take care! >>> >>> Al >>> >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: speakup-bounces at braille.uwo.ca >>> [mailto:speakup-bounces at braille.uwo.ca] >>> On Behalf Of John Heim >>> Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 12:23 PM >>> To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux. >>> Subject: Re: still more on bug >>> >>> Al, practically everything you wrote below counters arguements I never >>> made. >>> >>> First, I didn't say blind people who want a machine with a serial port >>> should go out there and build one. I offered that as one possible >>> solution >>> and, in fact, said it wasn't for everyone. It was the third option I >>> listed. >>> >>> Secondly, I never said people shouldn't be satisfied with software >>> speech. >>> I said hardware speech is necessary to some people for doing things like >>> rescuing down servers. If you never have to do something like that and >>> are >>> happy with software speech, obviously, its fine by me. >>> >>> Third, I never said ordinary users of speakup shouldn't ask for new >>> features. In fact, that's exactly what I did myself when I said that >>> speakup is going to have to support USB hardware synths someday. I >>> merely >>> objected to someone elses suggestion that it wasn't likely to happen. >>> We >>> weren't discussing whether supporting USB synths is a good idea or even >>> whether its reasonable to ask for that feature. We were only disagreeing >>> about how likely we are to ever see it. >>> >>> From: "Albert Sten-Clanton"<albert.e.sten_clanton at verizon.net> >>> To: "'Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.'" >>> <speakup at braille.uwo.ca> >>> Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2012 6:41 PM >>> Subject: RE: still more on bug >>> >>> >>>> John, now much sight, if any, would you think is needed to build a PC >>>> with serial ports? >>>> >>>> Not a direct respons to you, but I suspect that, if a majroity of >>>> blind folks using Linux do indeed express a degree of satisfation >>>> iwhth software speech, it could gbe because they're stuck with it, >>>> much as most blind people use Windows because, as somebody said to me, >>>> "you can't fight the giant." Software speech does have its advantages, >>>> perhaps portability being the most notable one I can think of, but, >>>> for those who like to know hwat's kicking in as booting progresses, >>>> there's nothing like using Speakup with a hardware synthesizer. >>>> (Indeed, this is a key difference between using Speakup and a hardware >>>> synthesizer and dealing with a Windows machine--or DOS in the old >>>> days.) For those who would say either write the relevant code or shut >>>> the hell up, I'd say this: if ordinary users don't count, then we can >>>> forget Linux ever even remotely approaching Windows or any other >>>> much-uused operating system in popularity. As a believer in freedom, >>>> I would regard it as an undermining of Linux' >>>> S mission to declare that only the elite among us have any business >>>> declaring--commanding--our destiny. (Even Microshaft doesn't do that, >>>> I >>>> think.) >>>> >>>> I appreciate your own efforts, so wish to be clear that the comments >>>> in the previous paragraph are aimed at a perspective that, as far as I >>>> can tell, does not seem to be yours at this pioint. As a user who is >>>> unlikely to master the relevant code, I do not wish to be relegated to >>>> the status of one who must accept whatever the alleged majority wishes >>>> to inflict and the programmers wish to comply with. I will >>>> reluctantly but dutifully crawl back to Windows, or find something >>>> else, if software freedom is not accompanied with top-notch software >>>> quality, or if we mere user mortals are commanded to take what we're >>>> given or wear muzzles. >>>> >>>> Al >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: speakup-bounces at braille.uwo.ca >>>> [mailto:speakup-bounces at braille.uwo.ca] >>>> On Behalf Of John Heim >>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2012 5:53 PM >>>> To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux. >>>> Subject: Re: still more on bug >>>> >>>> From: "Deedra Waters"<deedra at the-brannons.com> >>>> To: "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." >>>> <speakup at braille.uwo.ca> >>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 6:34 PM >>>>> I'm saying i know several who have worked on speakup over the years >>>>> and the folks who've maintained it lately can't fix it/haven't been >>>>> able to is probably the better wording here. As for me, no i'm no >>>>> coder at all but saying i'd be willing to work on it if i could code >>>>> my way out of a wet paper bag. >>>>> >>>> Well, don't be so negative, okay? First of all, the current group of >>>> developers are smart guys. I'm not saying they'll have it tomorrow but >>>> they may get around to it eventually. And if not, I'm sure someone >>>> will pick up the ball. Heck, it might even be me. >>>> >>>>> maybe you should tell del to start advertising the models with serial >>>>> ports?:P point is like i said the machines i've gotten which are >>>>> generally the shitmachines as i> call dells haven't had them:P >>>> It might be a good idea for you to ask on this list for >>>> recommendations next time you need to buy a new PC. Its not difficult >>>> to get a PC with a serial port. Another suggestion I have is to check >>>> used computer stores. You might be able to find a slightly older >>>> high-end model for cheap there. Of course, there is also the option of >>>> building your own PC. I built my last two PCs myself. Admittedly, that >>>> is not for the faint of heart. >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Speakup mailing list >>>> Speakup at braille.uwo.ca >>>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Speakup mailing list >>>> Speakup at braille.uwo.ca >>>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Speakup mailing list >>> Speakup at braille.uwo.ca >>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Speakup mailing list >>> Speakup at braille.uwo.ca >>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup >> >> >> -- >> >> Take care, >> Ty >> Web: http://tds-solutions.net >> The Aspen project: a light-weight barebones mud engine >> http://code.google.com/p/aspenmud >> >> Sent from my toaster. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Speakup mailing list >> Speakup at braille.uwo.ca >> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Speakup mailing list > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup > >
