State of accessibility on BSD systems

Garrett Klein garrettklein at
Mon Sep 22 19:37:56 EDT 2008


kvm/qemu also have ncurses interfaces. Try kvm -curses or qemu -curses.


Gregory Nowak wrote:
> Hash: SHA1
> On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 03:49:47AM -0700, Tony Baechler wrote:
>> OK, I was unclear obviously.  What you say is correct in most cases that
>> an emulator interface has nothing to do with the guest OS.  However, at
>> least when I played with Bochs a long time ago, Bochs was different.  If
>> you didn't need graphics, you could set it to only use a curses
>> interface for the emulated OS and it worked.
> Yes, this was even true for installing/running win95/wineyes back when
> I tried it. The biggest problem I found here was the lack of keyboard
> usability, (I.E. the tab key, the win/menu keys, ETC.), but that's a
> different story.
>> It comes with a sample 10
>> MB Linux disk image.  If you tell it to not use a GUI but to run the
>> image with the curses interface, you have a very minimal emulated Linux
>> system.  There isn't a lot you can do with it, but I verified that it in
>> fact worked.  I tried with other images but didn't get anywhere.  Maybe
>> that has changed but it used to work.
> I never tried the provided images. I just made an hd image, and tried
> a clean install of win95 on it.
>> Being that there was no GUI, I
>> don't think it was that slow but I don't remember.
> You might have been running bochs on a system with higher specs than
> mine. I was running it at the time on a 600 MHz pentium III system,
> with 256 megs of RAM, and I don't recall how much swap. Even so,
> whether or not you used a gui wouldn't have mattered much I don't
> think in terms of speed. As I said, speed depends on the goal of the
> bochs project, which is to emulate every single x86 instruction,
> rather than letting the native cpu do some of the work. This approach
> makes sense if you want to for example run windows, an x86 OS on a non
> x86 arch, like Sun sparc for example.
>>>> NetBSD  claims to run on anything including the Vax so I'm sure it
>>>> has a text  installer that could run in an emulator.
> Yeah, in an emulator, or a physical machine.
>> Huh?  Yes, the ports collection builds everything from source but you
>> can download precompiled packages as well, at least on FreeBSD.
> - From all of my research, you could get only the base system as
> binaries on netbsd. If there were binary builds for everything else
> besides that, I never found where you could get them from, and I did
> look all over the netbsd repos, like you suggested. Maybe this has
> changed now, but it was certainly true as far as I could tell, back
> when I was running netbsd. Also, it's probably not a good idea to
> assume that just because freebsd has something, that netbsd will have
> it too, (I'm referring specifically to binary packages here). There
> are reasons for why one is called freebsd, and the other is called
> netbsd, rather than being the same os identically, right down to the
> last detail. I can't speak
> for freebsd, I never tried it.
>> The
>> dependency tracking isn't the best but it wasn't that bad.  I would
>> check again, replacing XX with your country
>> code.
> Thanks for the suggestion, but I blew away my netbsd install about a
> year or more ago now, and don't plan to bring it back in the near future.
> Greg
> - --
> web site:
> gpg public key:
> skype: gregn1
> (authorization required, add me to your contacts list first)
> - --
> Free domains: or mail dns-manager at
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
> =y9dV
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup at

More information about the Speakup mailing list