still more on bug

[John Heim]

Oops... Twenty five years ago, I wrote unix device drivers for a living, not 
linux. I don't believe linux existed 25 years ago. I worked for a company 
called Merge Technologies (www.merge.com) writing drivers for medical 
imaging equipment. Ironic, isn't it?  A blind guy writing imaging device 
drivers. But that stuff takes a lot of math and I have a BS in math.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Heim" <jheim at math.wisc.edu>
To: <tyler at tysdomain.com>; "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." 
<speakup at braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Friday, February 17, 2012 12:35 PM
Subject: Re: still more on bug


>I think all you would need to do is write a device driver -- which is a 
>little like saying all you need to do is build a big enough rocket and you 
>can go to the moon. How's that joke go? How do you teach an elephant to 
>dance the bossinova?first you teach him to samba and from there its easy.
>
> Anyway, 25 years ago, I wrote linux device drivers for a living. But I 
> haven't written a line of C in anger for 15 years. Not unless you count 
> commenting out that line in the speakup synth.c program to get past the 
> bug that started all this.
>
> I intend to try to find a solution for that bug.  I don't want to step on 
> anybody's toes but I figure the current developers won't mind if I take a 
> look at that. But you can't barge into an open source project and just 
> take over. For all we know, there may be top men working on it right now. 
> There's no point in duplicating effort.  But I know no one is working on 
> the bug I have been talking about because I've already asked. At one time, 
> I'd have felt pretty qualified to take this on. Right now, I feel my best 
> qualifications are that I'm still breathing and willing to give it a try.
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Littlefield, Tyler" <tyler at tysdomain.com>
> To: "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." 
> <speakup at braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 6:13 PM
> Subject: Re: still more on bug
>
>
>>I think the responses you were refering to can be discarded and ignored. 
>>The "shitmachine" comment as well as many others didn't do much to bolster 
>>the poster's comments, and there wasn't much in the way of fact. Either 
>>way, I think that said poster was speaking for a very small minority, as a 
>>lot of people would like to see Speakup get more support.
>>
>> If I were a kernel guru, or had some way to hopping on that path to 
>> enlightenment, I'd be more than willing to help out since I already know 
>> c. I'm also lacking a USB synth, so that's another problem.
>> From what I understand though, the USB subsystem would have to be enabled 
>> for a USB synth to work. There's a lot more behind USB than serial; I 
>> know this much from my work I've done on a toy operating system I've been 
>> building. The external serial cards are also an issue, unless you can get 
>> one that would fit in the internal PCI slot--that I am unsure of. PCMCIA 
>> for example though is yet another system that has to be enabled. This is 
>> still doable, but you're going to miss out on earlier boot messages.
>>
>> Something I've found of interest, though it requires another system to 
>> catching boot messages is there is a networking boot setup in the kernel. 
>> I'm not really sure "networking boot" accurately describes it, but here 
>> are the docs:
>> http://www.mjmwired.net/kernel/Documentation/networking/netconsole.txt
>>
>> Something else worth looking into, and I'm not really sure if it was 
>> mentioned in this thread but it was for sure mentioned before is Speakup 
>> in user space. I'd be 100% willing to at least help with something like 
>> that, but I remember from previous conversations that there are reasons 
>> why Speakup is in kernel space--the TTY access being one of them. How 
>> possible would it be to promote speakup to User space (yeah, I guess that 
>> would get rid of boot messages, but netconsole is always there), and then 
>> just leave a thin layer behind in kernel space to provide the access to 
>> the kernel that we need? From what I understand from the bit I've done, 
>> there exists three points to access drivers from user space:
>> - System calls, (though it's probably prefered that these are not used, 
>> since installing a system call would require that you know what number it 
>> would be. If something else were to install a syscall before you, you 
>> couldn't have a constant number).
>> - The proc FS, which Speakup already uses to get and set information.
>> - A device in /dev.
>>
>> Could the TTY (and other access) be given through one of these so that 
>> the user-space speakup could gather the information it needed? What are 
>> the security implications of something like this? You obviously wouldn't 
>> want to just allow raw TTY access, so I'm not sure if there would be a 
>> way to limit this somehow.
>>
>> Just my two cents and ramblings. Like I said, if there was any way to 
>> make this work out, I'd love to help out with it. I just don't think I 
>> know enough about kernel programming to hop in the trenches and start 
>> fixing the bugs. Both because I don't know much about kernel programming, 
>> and from what I understand there is need for USB support and work for 
>> speakup running on systems with more than one processor, neither of which 
>> I have.
>>
>> On 2/16/2012 3:45 PM, Albert Sten-Clanton wrote:
>>> John, though the typing in my message below yours here was utterly lousy
>>> (too many beers), such criticisms as I made were not directed towards 
>>> you,
>>> and I said as much there and in a later message.  Those concerning the
>>> acceptance of software speech were in fact aimed at earlier comments 
>>> from
>>> somebody else.
>>>
>>> I most certainly and indisputably did not accuse you of saying that 
>>> blind
>>> people would have to build their own machines in order to get serial 
>>> ports:
>>> nothing you said gave any basis for such an assertion on my part, so I 
>>> never
>>> made it.  (Indeed, I had noted earlier yesterday that
>>>
>>> <www.pcsforeveruyone.com>
>>>
>>> May actually offer serial ports.)
>>>
>>> Furthermore, you are among the people to whom I recall expressing 
>>> gratitude
>>> yesterday for replying positively to my question whether a blind person
>>> could build a machine.  I must apologize if I wrote badly, but I 
>>> reiterate
>>> that I was not criticizing anything you said, and did not even address a
>>> couple of things you mention here.
>>>
>>> In sjhort, I have found your recent messages here concerning Speakup, 
>>> serial
>>> ports, and related matters helpful.  My concern here is that support for
>>> hardware speech may become difficult to get down the road, maybe even
>>> impossible for somebody not well-versed in kernel matters, and my 
>>> impression
>>> is that you may share this concern at least to some degree.
>>>
>>> Maybe using a reply to one of your messages was a bad idea; if so, for 
>>> that
>>> I apologize.  It was the vehicle I had, and, as I said above, I tried to 
>>> be
>>> clear that your comments were not the reason for my expressed concerns.
>>>
>>> Take care!
>>>
>>> Al
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: speakup-bounces at braille.uwo.ca 
>>> [mailto:speakup-bounces at braille.uwo.ca]
>>> On Behalf Of John Heim
>>> Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 12:23 PM
>>> To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.
>>> Subject: Re: still more on bug
>>>
>>> Al, practically everything you wrote below counters arguements I never 
>>> made.
>>>
>>> First, I didn't say blind people who want a machine with a serial port
>>> should go out there and build one. I offered that as one possible 
>>> solution
>>> and, in fact, said it wasn't for everyone. It was the third option I 
>>> listed.
>>>
>>> Secondly, I never said people shouldn't be satisfied with software 
>>> speech.
>>> I said hardware speech is necessary to some people for doing things like
>>> rescuing down servers.  If you never have to do something like that and 
>>> are
>>> happy with software speech, obviously, its fine by me.
>>>
>>> Third, I never said ordinary users of speakup shouldn't ask for new
>>> features.  In fact, that's exactly what I did myself when I said that
>>> speakup is going to have to support USB hardware synths someday.  I 
>>> merely
>>> objected to someone elses suggestion that it wasn't likely to happen. 
>>> We
>>> weren't discussing whether supporting USB synths is a good idea or even
>>> whether its reasonable to ask for that feature. We were only disagreeing
>>> about how likely we are to ever see it.
>>>
>>> From: "Albert Sten-Clanton"<albert.e.sten_clanton at verizon.net>
>>> To: "'Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.'"
>>> <speakup at braille.uwo.ca>
>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2012 6:41 PM
>>> Subject: RE: still more on bug
>>>
>>>
>>>> John, now much sight, if any, would you think is needed to build a PC
>>>> with serial ports?
>>>>
>>>> Not a direct respons to you, but I suspect that, if a majroity of
>>>> blind folks using Linux do indeed express a degree of satisfation
>>>> iwhth software speech, it could gbe because they're stuck with it,
>>>> much as most blind people use Windows because, as somebody said to me,
>>>> "you can't fight the giant." Software speech does have its advantages,
>>>> perhaps portability being the most notable one I can think of, but,
>>>> for those who like to know hwat's kicking in as booting progresses,
>>>> there's nothing like using Speakup with a hardware synthesizer.
>>>> (Indeed, this is a key difference between using Speakup and a hardware
>>>> synthesizer and dealing with a Windows machine--or DOS in the old
>>>> days.) For those who would say either write the relevant code or shut
>>>> the hell up, I'd say this:  if ordinary users don't count, then we can
>>>> forget Linux ever even remotely approaching Windows or any other
>>>> much-uused operating system in popularity.  As a believer in freedom,
>>>> I would regard it as an undermining of Linux'
>>>> S mission to declare that only the elite among us have any business
>>>> declaring--commanding--our destiny.  (Even Microshaft doesn't do that,
>>>> I
>>>> think.)
>>>>
>>>> I appreciate your own efforts, so wish to be clear that the comments
>>>> in the previous paragraph are aimed at a perspective that, as far as I
>>>> can tell, does not seem to be yours at this pioint.  As a user who is
>>>> unlikely to master the relevant code, I do not wish to be relegated to
>>>> the status of one who must accept whatever the alleged majority wishes
>>>> to inflict and the programmers wish to comply with.  I will
>>>> reluctantly but dutifully crawl back to Windows, or find something
>>>> else, if software freedom is not accompanied with top-notch software
>>>> quality, or if we mere user mortals are commanded to take what we're
>>>> given or wear muzzles.
>>>>
>>>> Al
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: speakup-bounces at braille.uwo.ca
>>>> [mailto:speakup-bounces at braille.uwo.ca]
>>>> On Behalf Of John Heim
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2012 5:53 PM
>>>> To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.
>>>> Subject: Re: still more on bug
>>>>
>>>> From: "Deedra Waters"<deedra at the-brannons.com>
>>>> To: "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux."
>>>> <speakup at braille.uwo.ca>
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 6:34 PM
>>>>> I'm saying i know several who have worked on speakup over the years
>>>>> and the folks who've maintained it lately can't fix it/haven't been
>>>>> able to is probably the better wording here. As for me, no i'm no
>>>>> coder at all but saying i'd be willing to work on it if i could code
>>>>> my way out of a wet paper bag.
>>>>>
>>>> Well, don't be so negative, okay? First of all, the current group of
>>>> developers are smart guys. I'm not saying they'll have it tomorrow but
>>>> they may get around to it eventually. And if not, I'm sure someone
>>>> will pick up the ball. Heck, it might even be me.
>>>>
>>>>> maybe you should tell del to start advertising the models with serial
>>>>> ports?:P point is like i said the machines i've gotten which are
>>>>> generally the shitmachines as i>  call dells haven't had them:P
>>>> It might be a good idea for you to ask on this list for
>>>> recommendations next time you need to buy a new PC. Its not difficult
>>>> to get a PC with a serial port. Another suggestion I have is to check
>>>> used computer stores. You might be able to find a slightly older
>>>> high-end model for cheap there. Of course, there is also the option of
>>>> building your own PC. I built my last two PCs myself. Admittedly, that
>>>> is not for the faint of heart.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Speakup mailing list
>>>> Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
>>>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Speakup mailing list
>>>> Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
>>>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Speakup mailing list
>>> Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
>>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Speakup mailing list
>>> Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
>>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>>
>>
>> -- 
>>
>> Take care,
>> Ty
>> Web: http://tds-solutions.net
>> The Aspen project: a light-weight barebones mud engine
>> http://code.google.com/p/aspenmud
>>
>> Sent from my toaster.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Speakup mailing list
>> Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
>