Modularisation

[Buddy Brannan]

On Tue, Sep 25, 2001 at 08:52:06AM +0100, Saqib Shaikh wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> While I think that it is good that parts of Speakup has been
included in the kernel, I would still like to see Speakup be a kernel
module so that it can be added/removed at will.  What do people think
of this? 

<Rant>
Haven't you been paying attention? This has only come up a million
times in the past several months. The smart people that do Speakup are
working on this. What more do ya want?! Know any more smart people who
can help with this (and are interested)?
</Rant>

> 
> Secondly, I personally don't like the fact that one must change the
> keymaps to use Speakup.  Could Speakup be changed so that it
> monitors all keypresses, and if it wants to deal with them it does
> so and then all other keys are passed through?  This would, in my
> opinion, be a far better solution. 

See above rant. Seems to me that how the keyboard is handled would
have to be changed, but i don't know...I'm not one of those smart
people I mentioned earlier. Seems to me that the modulization and
other more pressing projects are leaving Kirk et al with a pretty full
plate already...eh?!

> 
> Finally I would like to raise the issue of security.  Many of my
> friends at universities in the UK use Emacspeak rather than Speakup
> purely because our universities consider patching every kernel both
> a security risk and a hastle.  On the security side I also know of
> at least one distribution that refuses to include Speakup because of
> it being a security risk. 

Everything is a security risk. Your computer is on a network? Take it
off. It's a security risk. Everything is a security risk. But do the
benefits outweigh whatever risks there are? I think they do...which is
why I use Speakup. And who said anything about patching *every*
kernel? How about patching your own kernel on your own computer, or
how about bringing a Speakup boot disk so you can use that? Or if you
have to use other computers, how about an ssh connection to them?
That's the wunnerful thing about Linux. ... You don't have to use it
from the local console if'n you don't want to or need to. As for your
friends who use Emacspeak because it's less of a "security risk",
they're certainly welcome to that. That's why Linux is great--we have
choices. Choices are good. What, exactly, are these security risks?
You didn't say, exactly. Personally, I like the fact that I can use
any console-based app without being tied to a very, very, very (...)
large package that I may or may not want to use in order to use my system.

-- 
Buddy Brannan, KB5ELV    | From the pines down to the projects,
Email: davros at ycardz.com | Life pushes up through the cracks.
Phone: (972) 276-6360    | And it's only going forward,
ICQ: 36621210            | And it's never going back.--Small Potatoes