seeking feedback on kernel version

[Igor Gueths]

Hi Steve. Yes, I was aware of the fact that 2.4.19 didn't work with
Speakup 1.0. I happen to be using the Cvs version, so this is the version
that will get patched into the Cd kernel (s). This is good, because if the
user wants to upgrade to 2.4.19 he/she can do so in theory with no
problems. Now that you brought up the subject of boot floppies, as far as
I know nobody uses the 1.2 mb images right? I was first going to get the
Cd working (Isolinux), and then work on the floppy image.

May you code in the power of the source,
may the kernel, libraries, and utilities be with you,
throughout all distributions until the end of the epoch.

On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, Steve Holmes wrote:

> I'd definitely stick to 2.4.18.  Just remember to be careful with
> speakup here; the 1.0 version will work up to 2.4.18 kernel but if one
> goes to a 2.4.19 kernel they will have to use a CVS version.  Big
> changes apparently took place at 2.4.19.
>
> Not sure what to say about the boot images.  I, for one has a machine
> that is old enough not to support booting from the CD so I would still
> have to use boot floppies.  I think the big chalenge I ran into when
> preparing debian boot disks was matching module versions and the
> compiled kernel.  Even when I compiled the kernal myself, I couldn't
> seem to match up with the provided modules on the CD.
>
> By all means, go for it and let us know how it goes.  In fact, I would
> be curious to know just what precise steps you end up taking to get
> the job done.  I might want to do the same thing for academic thrills
> if for no other reason:).  Gee if we could ever get debian to go with
> speakup enabled boot images in the main package, the "Big three" would
> all have speech available without special downloads.
>
> On Sun, Oct 27, 2002 at 08:23:40PM -0500, Igor Gueths wrote:
> > Hi all. I am working on new Woody disks with Speakup built in. Version
> > 3.0r0 has both the 2.2 and 2.4.x kernels. Is anyone opposed to having only
> > a bootable Cd with the 2.4.x kernel (default)? My plan is to create a
> > bootable 3.0R0, and not work on the floppy images. The reasoning behind
> > this is that if someone installs from Cd, they will have to spend the same
> > amount of time downloading as they would if they booted from floppy, and
> > installed over a network. So what does everyone think about scrapping
> > 2.2.x? Bc what is most likely going to happen is that the person
> > installing the system is going to upgrade to the later kernel anyway.
> > Thanks for any feedback!
> >
> > May you code in the power of the source,
> > may the kernel, libraries, and utilities be with you,
> > throughout all distributions until the end of the epoch.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
> --
> Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.
>    See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>