The FAQ

[Janina Sajka]

Ann:

Just a few quick points from me, then I'm out of here for the day ...

On Sun, 17 Jun 2001, Ann Parsons wrote:

>  From the discussion about the
> different distros and the different ways to obtain good results, I
> have concluded that the instructions on how to install Speakup do not
> belong in the FAQ.  They belong in a full document of their own,
> complete with full discussion of the exact commands relating to
> synthes and distros and kernel versions.

I think this is a wise decision, but you do need to say something. Perhaps
it would be sufficient to say that there are several choices. It might
even be useful to rank them from easiest to most challenging:

a.)	Zipspeak. Hands down easiest, but not a full blown install nor
fully featured;

b.)	Speakup enabled distributions are available. Use these (and not
the ones at the standard distro sites) as found on the speakup (and
octothorp?) site to get speakup in the deal. The fact is that these sites
do include documentation on how to get installation happening.

c.)	Compiling from source. Trickiest for beginners, but worth
learning. Probably the way to go if you've already got linux working on a
computer;

> RE the question about which versions of speakup work with which
> kernels, I think that I will change 0.10 to 0.10A and say that those
> who are using older kernel versions need to consult either the list or
> blah, blah, docs which I hope are available.
Well, they should be available if they aren't. This part isn't rocket
science, though. I really do think handling this correctly is a matter of
a few sentences--but that means looking at the ftp site for what sources
are there currently, and ascertaining which belongs to what kernels. I
frankly don't remember.
 >
> RE the bit about Linux and older systems, no, I disagree about leaving
> this out.  Reason?  This is an issue close to my heart.  It is
> precisely because Linux can run well on a 486, I have one upstairs,
> that it is so valuable!  It is not difficult to get Linux to work on a
> 486, especially if you use a distro that allows you to use the pkgs
> you need instead of the pkgs that include X and so on.  Debian and
> Slackware are particularly well suited to this type of customized
> installation.  If there were a doc about which pkgs were actually
> needed in order to run a decent system on a 486, that would be great.

Well, but that is the issue. I'm not disagreeing with you about including
older systems. I think it's particularly valuable to do that. I just want
a good sense of pointing users at appropriate expectations. If it's easy
to get a good system from the existing distro install routines--then I
withdraw and apologize for wassting bandwidth. I only though to bring this
up because I was faced with a 486 with only a 400 Mb hd the other day, and
had no idea of what I could do in one hour without doing some research and
making a few runs at an install before getting one that would be worth
keeping.
Great work, Ann!