question on speakup-source debian package

[John covici]

OK, I should put in a word here -- in the latest speakup and I am not
sure about how Debian implements this, the kernel is not actually
patched unless you want to be able to use menuconfig to control what
is built in or not -- it just compiles the modules and you load the
ones you want.  Kernel source is no longer touched at all.

Hope this helps.

on Saturday 07/26/2008 Gaijin(gaijin at clearwire.net) wrote
 > On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 11:23:51PM -0700, Gregory Nowak wrote:
 > > I think you didn't read my question carefully enough.
 > 
 > 	I replied to what I quoted from your previous post.  I'm
 > old-school and prefer a simple tarball over any of the other "supposed"
 > shortcut utilities to help patch the kernel, like git and
 > module-assistant, the latter who's use never seems to be mentioned when
 > patching SpeakUP into a kernel.  I'm just saying that you could compile
 > a 2.6.26 kernel on a Commodore-64 if the compiler is correct, as it just
 > translates sourcecode into bits and bytes the CPU understands.  I'm
 > assuming from what I've gathered that git just downloads the SpeakUP
 > code, though I've never gotten it to work, and running the patch script
 > that comes with SpeakUP is what patches the kernel.  Others can correct
 > me if I'm wrong.  I'm not sure why module-assistant was added for Debian
 > and seems like just another complication tossed into the process, so I'm
 > looking for a different distro that doesn't depend on 5 million lines of
 > perl script just to keep it working.  Debian already has 7 (that I know
 > of) interfaces into the package manager alone, each with extensive
 > documentation.
 > 
 > 			Michael
 > 
 > _______________________________________________
 > Speakup mailing list
 > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
 > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 
Your life is like a penny.  You're going to lose it.  The question is:
How do
you spend it?

         John Covici
         covici at ccs.covici.com