Mario Lang, le Sat 17 Feb 2007 15:21:50 +0100, a écrit : > OTOH, the way serial IO is currently done in speakup > is on the one hand very ugly and hackish, OTOH does it > also provide a "feature". If the kernel crashes but > speakup somehow can still run, the user can review the screen > and read the error message.
This "feature" shouldn't be implemented in speakup but mainstream: serial consoles would benefit from it too. And the kernel actually _already_ has support for something similar, it's called "early serial support" (for supporting it before IRQs are set up), and could be reused for this. > >> Back when I was still maintaining a speakup enabled kernel > >> in Debian, I bought a hardware speech synthesizer especially > >> for testing speakup support for it. > > > > Mmm, I'd say the best way would rather to write a "fake" speakup driver, > > that outputs plain text on the serial port. That would let _everybody_ > > test speakup (including all kernel hackers), not only people that have > > the hardware. > > I am not sure this is going to be helpful. If you want > to test a talking application, you'll have to have it talk, > otherwise you can't test it really. What is the difference between having a hardware synthesizer talking and outputing plain text on the serial device? (from the point of view of a kernel hacker that wants to quickly check that speakup still works I mean, not from the point of view of someone actually working on accessibility). > BTW, for those that dont have a hardware speech synthesizer, they can > still use the speech-dispatcher adaptor provided by speakup. That doesn't permit do work on the serial support, which is one of the key points of integrating speakup upstream. Samuel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
