Why I can't recommend Arch or Gentoo

[Tony Baechler]

All,

I've been following the Talking Arch discussion with great interest. I'm
sure what I am about to say will be rather unpopular, but I can only go by
my own experiences and what I've read. If these issues can be addressed, I
think both distributions have great potential, but as things stand now, I
can't recommend them. I'll start with Arch first.

I had no problem downloading Arch and burning it to a CD. It fit on a CD
without difficulty, but apparently the current release doesn't. That is
most unfortunate as not everyone wants to burn a DVD for a command line
based distro. You expect it with Fedora and Ubuntu, but even Debian has
several small CD images for installation. Hopefully something can be done
to get it back to CD sized media.

Unlike what Kyle says, I couldn't get speech upon boot. I pressed Enter at
least six times, plus other random characters. I've also encountered the
problem where speech starts after a few keys, but not in this case. I know
where the problem lies. It's because of my sound card, specifically the
emu10k1 driver. It has a weird problem with no volume by default. It isn't
muted, but the analog switch is toggled. This was fixed a long time ago in
Debian and Ubuntu, but obviously didn't make it to Arch. I reported this to
the support address and didn't get a reply for about two weeks. There was
no interest in fixing the problem, even when I offered to help.

Similarly, due to how brltty is configured by default, it locked up my
DECtalk Express. I had to reset it by turning it off and on before it would
talk again. Again, in the same email, I reported this to support and there
was no interest in fixing it. In looking at the brltty.conf installed with
Debian testing, it looks like literally just commenting out a line would fix
this. I understand that some people still use serial Braille displays, but
USB autodetection is the default and serial devices aren't very common
nowadays, so the serial detection can probably be safely disabled. People
can still start brltty by hand or edit brltty.conf directly.

Finally, due to its unofficial nature, it is not officially supported by the
Arch developers, so there isn't a way to file bugs in a public forum, such
as a bug tracker. It has the same problem as Vinux (which I also don't
recommend) in that there are only two active developers working on it. If
one of them gets sick or for some reason can't keep up with the latest
releases, so much for Talking whatever. I am strongly against specialized
distributions for the blind exactly for this reason. Whatever happened to
Oralux? Both Debian and Ubuntu do have accessibility teams and the
developers take accessibility issues seriously.

Although I like Gentoo in concept, I can't recommend it for different
reasons. As others have pointed out, it's very complicated to install.
Unless you really like the command line and have a serious Linux/Unix
background, you're going to really struggle to get it finished. It took me
about a week from start to finish. Debian and Ubuntu take me an hour or
two. It's all very well to say Linux is for everyone, but most people won't
have the patience to go through literally a book to get their system up and
running. I think even Fedora is better now in this regard, but I haven't
tried it yet.

When I did get Gentoo finally working, I was forced to install Apache 2.0
when I didn't want it. This was about 10 years ago, so hopefully this has
changed, but no matter what I tried, I couldn't get 1.3 to install due to it
being masked. I found a way around the mask by forcing it, but I ended up
with a broken install. What was the last straw was when the computer
completely locked up due to a kernel issue. There seemed to be no way to
fix it and I quickly realized that Gentoo is many things, but stable isn't
one of them. I would never again attempt to use it in a production
environment. It would be nice if they would tell you it isn't for servers.

Finally, here is the biggest reason why I can't recommend either Gentoo or
Arch. They don't have a live CD/DVD with a working graphical desktop. As
much as I don't like Vinux, it does come up with a desktop which you can
try. Ubuntu is the best in this regard in my opinion as it plays a sound so
you know it actually works. I'm not going to make Windows comparisons here,
but if the Linux community wants the blind Windows community to take Linux
seriously, there needs to be a talking GUI which just works. Unless someone
really likes DOS, they aren't going to like the command line enough to give
it a fair chance. This applies to the sighted community as well.

What do I recommend? For people who do like the command line and have a
strong DOS background, I recommend Debian. It has a talking, menu-driven
installer. The command line is there if you want it, but it isn't required.
For most people, I recommend Ubuntu MATE. It's fast, stable, works on old
hardware, has a very familiar feel to Windows and the live DVD just works
for the most part. Since Ubuntu gets fixes made in Debian, I don't have the
sound card problem. Ubuntu does not enable brltty by default, but again,
it's a matter of changing one line in /etc/default/brltty to enable it. I
was able to fully install Ubuntu without sighted help. I was able to
navigate to one of my NTFS partitions with lots of mp3 files, open the
folder I wanted, select a file and play it. All of this just worked without
me having to do anything special. Once I got it working, of course I
tweaked it to suit my needs, but I wasn't required to do so. It was my own
choice to remove Pulse, for example.

In conclusion, I run a Linux support business, so I darn well better
specialize in Linux support and know what I'm talking about. I've received
several complaints about both Arch and Vinux which I won't go into here.
Generally, if I get people interested in Linux, they want a GUI. I very
much subscribe to the belief that Linux is for everyone, even to saying that
no one should require an unofficial distro. That's why I almost always
recommend Ubuntu. I would recommend Fedora, but they were very opposed to
accessibility in the past, to the point that they referred people to
speakupmodified.org. For all I know, you still can't install a server
release of Fedora with Speakup.

I've begun working on a Debian live CD due to the fact that the official
live CD doesn't come up talking, but it is 99% identical to the official CD
except for accessibility packages. The accessibility features can be easily
turned off with two commands and anyone can build their own live CD (with
live-build) if they have the patience. I don't doubt that Talking Arch is
very good and is similarly identical to the real Arch, but someone
unfamiliar with Arch (such as me) apparently can't download an official Arch
CD and have speech. This problem will eventually be fixed in the Debian
live CD, in which case my CD hopefully won't be necessary.


--------------------
Tony Baechler, founder, Baechler Access Technology Services
Putting accessibility at the forefront of technology
mailto:***@batsupport.com
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]

[Michał Zegan]

The thing about no live desktop is an explicit arch decision, could even
say it's a feature, same about gentoo, but gentoo has, or did have at
some point, a live image.

Post by Tony Baechler
All,
I've been following the Talking Arch discussion with great interest.
I'm sure what I am about to say will be rather unpopular, but I can
only go by my own experiences and what I've read. If these issues can
be addressed, I think both distributions have great potential, but as
things stand now, I can't recommend them. I'll start with Arch first.
I had no problem downloading Arch and burning it to a CD. It fit on a
CD without difficulty, but apparently the current release doesn't.
That is most unfortunate as not everyone wants to burn a DVD for a
command line based distro. You expect it with Fedora and Ubuntu, but
even Debian has several small CD images for installation. Hopefully
something can be done to get it back to CD sized media.
Unlike what Kyle says, I couldn't get speech upon boot. I pressed
Enter at least six times, plus other random characters. I've also
encountered the problem where speech starts after a few keys, but not
in this case. I know where the problem lies. It's because of my
sound card, specifically the emu10k1 driver. It has a weird problem
with no volume by default. It isn't muted, but the analog switch is
toggled. This was fixed a long time ago in Debian and Ubuntu, but
obviously didn't make it to Arch. I reported this to the support
address and didn't get a reply for about two weeks. There was no
interest in fixing the problem, even when I offered to help.
Similarly, due to how brltty is configured by default, it locked up my
DECtalk Express. I had to reset it by turning it off and on before it
would talk again. Again, in the same email, I reported this to
support and there was no interest in fixing it. In looking at the
brltty.conf installed with Debian testing, it looks like literally
just commenting out a line would fix this. I understand that some
people still use serial Braille displays, but USB autodetection is the
default and serial devices aren't very common nowadays, so the serial
detection can probably be safely disabled. People can still start
brltty by hand or edit brltty.conf directly.
Finally, due to its unofficial nature, it is not officially supported
by the Arch developers, so there isn't a way to file bugs in a public
forum, such as a bug tracker. It has the same problem as Vinux (which
I also don't recommend) in that there are only two active developers
working on it. If one of them gets sick or for some reason can't keep
up with the latest releases, so much for Talking whatever. I am
strongly against specialized distributions for the blind exactly for
this reason. Whatever happened to Oralux? Both Debian and Ubuntu do
have accessibility teams and the developers take accessibility issues
seriously.
Although I like Gentoo in concept, I can't recommend it for different
reasons. As others have pointed out, it's very complicated to
install. Unless you really like the command line and have a serious
Linux/Unix background, you're going to really struggle to get it
finished. It took me about a week from start to finish. Debian and
Ubuntu take me an hour or two. It's all very well to say Linux is for
everyone, but most people won't have the patience to go through
literally a book to get their system up and running. I think even
Fedora is better now in this regard, but I haven't tried it yet.
When I did get Gentoo finally working, I was forced to install Apache
2.0 when I didn't want it. This was about 10 years ago, so hopefully
this has changed, but no matter what I tried, I couldn't get 1.3 to
install due to it being masked. I found a way around the mask by
forcing it, but I ended up with a broken install. What was the last
straw was when the computer completely locked up due to a kernel
issue. There seemed to be no way to fix it and I quickly realized
that Gentoo is many things, but stable isn't one of them. I would
never again attempt to use it in a production environment. It would
be nice if they would tell you it isn't for servers.
Finally, here is the biggest reason why I can't recommend either
Gentoo or Arch. They don't have a live CD/DVD with a working
graphical desktop. As much as I don't like Vinux, it does come up
with a desktop which you can try. Ubuntu is the best in this regard
in my opinion as it plays a sound so you know it actually works. I'm
not going to make Windows comparisons here, but if the Linux community
wants the blind Windows community to take Linux seriously, there needs
to be a talking GUI which just works. Unless someone really likes DOS,
they aren't going to like the command line enough to give it a fair
chance. This applies to the sighted community as well.
What do I recommend? For people who do like the command line and have
a strong DOS background, I recommend Debian. It has a talking,
menu-driven installer. The command line is there if you want it, but
it isn't required. For most people, I recommend Ubuntu MATE. It's
fast, stable, works on old hardware, has a very familiar feel to
Windows and the live DVD just works for the most part. Since Ubuntu
gets fixes made in Debian, I don't have the sound card problem.
Ubuntu does not enable brltty by default, but again, it's a matter of
changing one line in /etc/default/brltty to enable it. I was able to
fully install Ubuntu without sighted help. I was able to navigate to
one of my NTFS partitions with lots of mp3 files, open the folder I
wanted, select a file and play it. All of this just worked without me
having to do anything special. Once I got it working, of course I
tweaked it to suit my needs, but I wasn't required to do so. It was
my own choice to remove Pulse, for example.
In conclusion, I run a Linux support business, so I darn well better
specialize in Linux support and know what I'm talking about. I've
received several complaints about both Arch and Vinux which I won't go
into here. Generally, if I get people interested in Linux, they want a
GUI. I very much subscribe to the belief that Linux is for everyone,
even to saying that no one should require an unofficial distro.
That's why I almost always recommend Ubuntu. I would recommend
Fedora, but they were very opposed to accessibility in the past, to
the point that they referred people to speakupmodified.org. For all I
know, you still can't install a server release of Fedora with Speakup.
I've begun working on a Debian live CD due to the fact that the
official live CD doesn't come up talking, but it is 99% identical to
the official CD except for accessibility packages. The accessibility
features can be easily turned off with two commands and anyone can
build their own live CD (with live-build) if they have the patience.
I don't doubt that Talking Arch is very good and is similarly
identical to the real Arch, but someone unfamiliar with Arch (such as
me) apparently can't download an official Arch CD and have speech.
This problem will eventually be fixed in the Debian live CD, in which
case my CD hopefully won't be necessary.
--------------------
Tony Baechler, founder, Baechler Access Technology Services
Putting accessibility at the forefront of technology
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

[Tony Baechler]

OK, fine, but here's the thing. As long as most people (yes, there are
exceptions) want a live desktop, I can't recommend Arch. I've had a few
people tell me privately that they won't even consider Arch for exactly this
reason. If it's a choice by the Arch developers, that's too bad as most
people are turned off by this.

I haven't seriously looked at Gentoo in about 10 years, so if they do have a
live desktop image, I don't know about it. I haven't seen it on the various
mirrors. If there is such an image, please send me a link and I'll evaluate
it. Similarly, if there is a simple installer which actually guides you
through the process like Debian or FreeBSD, I'll take a look. I like Gentoo
in concept, but I can't recommend it for the masses due to the above issues.
There was going to be a fork which was going to address some of these
issues, but I don't know whatever became of it.

The thing about no live desktop is an explicit arch decision, could even say
it's a feature, same about gentoo, but gentoo has, or did have at some
point, a live image.

[Michał Zegan]

As said before, arch is explicitly made to be simple, and for users that
want to play with it and know enough to do this. Arch is not for the
masses, unless someone installs it and prepares before.

Post by Tony Baechler
OK, fine, but here's the thing. As long as most people (yes, there
are exceptions) want a live desktop, I can't recommend Arch. I've had
a few people tell me privately that they won't even consider Arch for
exactly this reason. If it's a choice by the Arch developers, that's
too bad as most people are turned off by this.
I haven't seriously looked at Gentoo in about 10 years, so if they do
have a live desktop image, I don't know about it. I haven't seen it
on the various mirrors. If there is such an image, please send me a
link and I'll evaluate it. Similarly, if there is a simple installer
which actually guides you through the process like Debian or FreeBSD,
I'll take a look. I like Gentoo in concept, but I can't recommend it
for the masses due to the above issues. There was going to be a fork
which was going to address some of these issues, but I don't know
whatever became of it.

The thing about no live desktop is an explicit arch decision, could even say
it's a feature, same about gentoo, but gentoo has, or did have at some
point, a live image.

_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

[Kyle]

Arch and Gentoo are essentially designed for OEM's and DIY folks. Of
course they're not going to have a desktop coming up on the live image.
That's not the problem they are designed to address. Arch and Gentoo
are designed to start from nothing and give you exactly what you want.
If that's not your thing, then either don't use it or set it up for
someone who wants a customized desktop.

For Arch that comes up with a desktop, try Manjaro, or if you need it
to come right up talking, Sonar would be your thing. These are not pure
Arch distros, but they instead copy the Arch repositories and make some
changes downstream at the distro level, and they come up with graphical
desktops based on the iso you download.

For a desktop Gentoo, give Sabayon a try. It's somewhat of a Gentoo
fork, but it's actually more of an overlay. I believe it has GNOME and
MATE versions, and it even has its own binary package manager, though
it also works with Portage. Just a heads-up though, I believe they
still recommend using the binary package manager first, and Portage
only if you can't find a binary package. I think they do some
downstream distro-level things as well. Hope this helps.
Sent from my silver lining

[Glenn]

I too wanted the talking Arch, and when it did not come up talking, I
considered that it did not like my sound card.
I'm using an Acer laptop.
I also considered trying it on another computer, but when I read all there
was to installing it, I lost interest.
I have installed Linux with the GUI interface many times, sometimes with
accessibility problems, but that aside, it went well and was easy.
I think a GUI interface on the disk would be nice for even installing the
CLI interface.
Glenn
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tony Baechler" <***@baechler.net>
To: "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux."
<***@linux-speakup.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 3:06 AM
Subject: Re: Why I can't recommend Arch or Gentoo


OK, fine, but here's the thing. As long as most people (yes, there are
exceptions) want a live desktop, I can't recommend Arch. I've had a few
people tell me privately that they won't even consider Arch for exactly this
reason. If it's a choice by the Arch developers, that's too bad as most
people are turned off by this.

I haven't seriously looked at Gentoo in about 10 years, so if they do have a
live desktop image, I don't know about it. I haven't seen it on the various
mirrors. If there is such an image, please send me a link and I'll evaluate
it. Similarly, if there is a simple installer which actually guides you
through the process like Debian or FreeBSD, I'll take a look. I like Gentoo
in concept, but I can't recommend it for the masses due to the above issues.
There was going to be a fork which was going to address some of these
issues, but I don't know whatever became of it.

The thing about no live desktop is an explicit arch decision, could even say
it's a feature, same about gentoo, but gentoo has, or did have at some
point, a live image.

_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
***@linux-speakup.org
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

[Kyle]

TalkingArch won't be able to provide a graphical desktop on the live
image, as Arch itself doesn't provide one. That said, it is indeed
possible to make such a live image that would include the GNOME or MATE
packages necessary to have a running desktop at boot time, and it could
even be made to talk easily. As a matter of fact, someone did release
an Arch-MATE iso I think about a year ago that did exactly this. It
came up with a running MATE desktop, but also included the Arch install
scripts for installing a real Arch system onto any hard disk or USB
drive. I don't think this ever left the testing phase however. It does
seem like a good idea for something to have fun trying.
Sent from my laughing gas

[Tony Baechler]

I never got as far as looking at the Arch installation because of the two
major problems, one being the lack of sound and the other being with brltty
locking up my DECtalk Express. However, the more I think about it, the more
I think the problems are not with Talking Arch specifically, but with Arch
upstream. Not being an Arch user and no longer being interested, I'm not
going to do anything about it, but someone should probably file bugs on
this. Whether we like it or not, sometimes we need to make mods to talking
media in order to get around strange accessibility issues. I think this is
one of those cases, at least with brltty in particular, but that's not my
decision to make.

With my own live CD, it's entirely Debian packages with a few very minor
scripts and a startup sound. While it can be installed to the hard drive
with a single command (bootcd2disk), that isn't its intended purpose,
although it is an option for people who want a working Debian system which
comes up talking with no hassle.

Out of curiosity, what is your sound card? It might be a matter of the
firmware being non-free, in which case most distros aren't going to work
unless they provide non-free firmware. If it works on another distro, it's
probably an Arch problem. Also, it might be muted by default, in which case
Talking Arch (and all distros) should include unmute scripts.

Post by Glenn
I too wanted the talking Arch, and when it did not come up talking, I
considered that it did not like my sound card.
I'm using an Acer laptop.
I also considered trying it on another computer, but when I read all there
was to installing it, I lost interest.
I have installed Linux with the GUI interface many times, sometimes with
accessibility problems, but that aside, it went well and was easy.
I think a GUI interface on the disk would be nice for even installing the
CLI interface.
Glenn

[Jude DaShiell]

ArchLinux wasn't responsible for preventing your dectalk express from
talking. That was the folks that do Linux kernel development since the
serial interface got broken by someone trying to fix something they
didn't know about in terms of the source code and the use of that source
code. I don't know if you tried ArchLinux directed at a sound card or
not. The braille tty probably used serial ports so the Linux kernel
developers took that down too with that single incorrect patch.

Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2015 07:20:26
Reply-To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.
Subject: Re: Why I can't recommend Arch or Gentoo
I never got as far as looking at the Arch installation because of the two
major problems, one being the lack of sound and the other being with brltty
locking up my DECtalk Express. However, the more I think about it, the more
I think the problems are not with Talking Arch specifically, but with Arch
upstream. Not being an Arch user and no longer being interested, I'm not
going to do anything about it, but someone should probably file bugs on
this. Whether we like it or not, sometimes we need to make mods to talking
media in order to get around strange accessibility issues. I think this is
one of those cases, at least with brltty in particular, but that's not my
decision to make.
With my own live CD, it's entirely Debian packages with a few very minor
scripts and a startup sound. While it can be installed to the hard drive
with a single command (bootcd2disk), that isn't its intended purpose,
although it is an option for people who want a working Debian system which
comes up talking with no hassle.
Out of curiosity, what is your sound card? It might be a matter of the
firmware being non-free, in which case most distros aren't going to work
unless they provide non-free firmware. If it works on another distro, it's
probably an Arch problem. Also, it might be muted by default, in which case
Talking Arch (and all distros) should include unmute scripts.

Post by Glenn
I too wanted the talking Arch, and when it did not come up talking, I
considered that it did not like my sound card.
I'm using an Acer laptop.
I also considered trying it on another computer, but when I read all there
was to installing it, I lost interest.
I have installed Linux with the GUI interface many times, sometimes with
accessibility problems, but that aside, it went well and was easy.
I think a GUI interface on the disk would be nice for even installing the
CLI interface.
Glenn

_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

--

[Tony Baechler]

No, you're wrong. Debian, Ubuntu, etc don't have this problem. The problem
seems to be entirely in the brltty package as shipped with Talking Arch.
I'm guessing, but based on the brltty.conf shipped with Debian, the default
is to probe the serial port for a Braille display. Whatever it sends to the
serial port causes the DECtalk Express to emit random characters and
completely stop speaking until it is turned off and on. The sound card
problem is an unrelated issue, also related to Arch, but probably upstream,
not Talking Arch specifically.

Post by Jude DaShiell
ArchLinux wasn't responsible for preventing your dectalk express from
talking. That was the folks that do Linux kernel development since the
serial interface got broken by someone trying to fix something they didn't
know about in terms of the source code and the use of that source code. I
don't know if you tried ArchLinux directed at a sound card or not. The
braille tty probably used serial ports so the Linux kernel developers took
that down too with that single incorrect patch.

[Kyle]

First of all, if you had taken the time to have a look at the blog for
TalkingArch
https://blog.talkingarch.tk/
you would have seen the post where I specifically mentioned that an
older CD-sized image was still available, and how to request it. I
still don't know how Arch itself will handle being larger than 700MB,
which will likely happen by the end of the year, but I'm guessing they
will have similar requirements, possibly with no way to request a CD
copy. I do keep July's iso around, which is the last one under 700MB.
To be quite honest with you, I have only had one complaint about the
iso being larger than 700MB, and it comes from you, and is a complaint
about the image being too big for a CD instead of the expected request
for a smaller image. I have mentioned the size increases in several
places since April or May of this year, and have even tried to get
input from users, and all the input I have gotten until now indicated
that I should just go ahead and build the larger images, because no one
uses CD's that can't write to a flash drive or DVD instead. My
comaintainer did mention keeping around a smaller copy while it works,
so I have done this, providing a way to request this smaller copy if
needed. Although it hasn't yet been a month, I have absolutely 0
requests for a CD-sized copy of TalkingArch until you cited this as a
reason why you can't recommend it, which I must see as a baseless
complaint rather than a serious request for an image of a smaller size.

Regarding the sound problem on your specific card, I can probably fix
this if I have a little more information about the problem. On my
system, the emu10k1 driver works perfectly, and there is no problem
with the volume. So the problem appears to be specific to your card
rather than the driver itself. Given this, I will be unable to test
your device without your participation, and since you have as much as
said that you are not interested in Arch at all, I will be unable to
help you fix your specific problem, not due to a lack of interest on my
part, but due to your unwillingness to help test any fixes I may be
able to make, and my inability to test such fixes on my own.

Regarding brltty, I have no braille equipment, nor do I have any serial
speech synthesizer, so I am unable to test this either. My comaintainer
is able to work with braille, and I believe external speech as well, so
he may be able to help you, but then again, you have only complained
about the way we handle TalkingArch on a public list, and how much
better you feel Debian and Ubuntu are, rather than reporting a problem
in an attempt to get it fixed, so there's again probably little we can
do.

Regarding blind specific distros, I have just as much of a problem with
them as you, but TalkingArch is *only* the talking live image, and is
not a blind specific distro. Once you install TalkingArch, what you
actually end up with is Arch Linux, just as you would have had you
installed it from the Arch iso at https://archlinux.org/. This is
completely intentional, as we wanted it to be just as close to Arch
Linux in form and function as possible, and the installation process
should give you the real thing, not some sort of a blind specific
install, unless you perform the extra installation steps to get a
talking system. That said, I find it rather odd that you complain about
what we didn't fix soon enough for you in TalkingArch, and how bad you
think blind specific distros are, but then you turn right around and
say that you'll be making a talking Debian live CD that is essentially
TalkingArch for Debian with a single developer, specifically you,
because you think you can somehow do it better. Well, I guess that
means that we can't expect any participation from you at all, either in
making fixes or testing them. I do, however, wish you the best of luck
in your endeavor. Debian is indeed a good distro to work with, and I'm
sure it will serve you well.

Regarding TalkingArch not starting with a working graphical
environment, TalkingArch is not the only talking image available that
is based at least partially on Arch Linux. Sonar is based on Manjaro,
which is an Arch-based distro, and it does start with a talking
graphical environment, either MATE or GNOME, your choice. It has a very
similar rolling release model to Arch, but addes unstable, testing and
stable branches somewhat similar to Debian, but kept up-to-date with
the latest software. Perhaps this would be better for those who need a
talking graphical desktop.

Finally, I do wish to apologize for any e-mail I may have missed at the
TalkingArch support address. I do know that I missed some, and wasn't
able to answer some others in a timely manner. At this point, I believe
I'm the only one handling the support e-mail, so if your question went
unanswered, it was not due to a lack of interest in fixing a problem,
but possibly either an oversite on my part or a question for which I
was unable to find an answer. Perhaps the IRC channel would have solved
your problem more quickly, as there are more people who can help you.
#talkingarch at irc.netwirc.tk is always open, and you can even request
a CD image there. The entire aim of this channel is to be as fun and
friendly as possible, and to help you in any way we can. That said,
biters will be bitten back, as we do have an uncensored channel.
Therefore, if you want a fun and friendly place to hang out and to
discuss TalkingArch or anything else, feel free to drop in, but do be
friendly yourself in order to keep the temperature from rising too
high.
Sent from my something or other

[Littlefield, Tyler]

This email seems more geared at being self defensive and passive
aggressive than it does in trying to fix the actual problems. Rather
than stating that you can but it probably won't happen, just state that
you can fix it provided help? There's no need to throw a tantrum.

Post by Kyle
First of all, if you had taken the time to have a look at the blog for
TalkingArch
https://blog.talkingarch.tk/
you would have seen the post where I specifically mentioned that an
older CD-sized image was still available, and how to request it. I
still don't know how Arch itself will handle being larger than 700MB,
which will likely happen by the end of the year, but I'm guessing they
will have similar requirements, possibly with no way to request a CD
copy. I do keep July's iso around, which is the last one under 700MB.
To be quite honest with you, I have only had one complaint about the
iso being larger than 700MB, and it comes from you, and is a complaint
about the image being too big for a CD instead of the expected request
for a smaller image. I have mentioned the size increases in several
places since April or May of this year, and have even tried to get
input from users, and all the input I have gotten until now indicated
that I should just go ahead and build the larger images, because no one
uses CD's that can't write to a flash drive or DVD instead. My
comaintainer did mention keeping around a smaller copy while it works,
so I have done this, providing a way to request this smaller copy if
needed. Although it hasn't yet been a month, I have absolutely 0
requests for a CD-sized copy of TalkingArch until you cited this as a
reason why you can't recommend it, which I must see as a baseless
complaint rather than a serious request for an image of a smaller size.
Regarding the sound problem on your specific card, I can probably fix
this if I have a little more information about the problem. On my
system, the emu10k1 driver works perfectly, and there is no problem
with the volume. So the problem appears to be specific to your card
rather than the driver itself. Given this, I will be unable to test
your device without your participation, and since you have as much as
said that you are not interested in Arch at all, I will be unable to
help you fix your specific problem, not due to a lack of interest on my
part, but due to your unwillingness to help test any fixes I may be
able to make, and my inability to test such fixes on my own.
Regarding brltty, I have no braille equipment, nor do I have any serial
speech synthesizer, so I am unable to test this either. My comaintainer
is able to work with braille, and I believe external speech as well, so
he may be able to help you, but then again, you have only complained
about the way we handle TalkingArch on a public list, and how much
better you feel Debian and Ubuntu are, rather than reporting a problem
in an attempt to get it fixed, so there's again probably little we can
do.
Regarding blind specific distros, I have just as much of a problem with
them as you, but TalkingArch is *only* the talking live image, and is
not a blind specific distro. Once you install TalkingArch, what you
actually end up with is Arch Linux, just as you would have had you
installed it from the Arch iso at https://archlinux.org/. This is
completely intentional, as we wanted it to be just as close to Arch
Linux in form and function as possible, and the installation process
should give you the real thing, not some sort of a blind specific
install, unless you perform the extra installation steps to get a
talking system. That said, I find it rather odd that you complain about
what we didn't fix soon enough for you in TalkingArch, and how bad you
think blind specific distros are, but then you turn right around and
say that you'll be making a talking Debian live CD that is essentially
TalkingArch for Debian with a single developer, specifically you,
because you think you can somehow do it better. Well, I guess that
means that we can't expect any participation from you at all, either in
making fixes or testing them. I do, however, wish you the best of luck
in your endeavor. Debian is indeed a good distro to work with, and I'm
sure it will serve you well.
Regarding TalkingArch not starting with a working graphical
environment, TalkingArch is not the only talking image available that
is based at least partially on Arch Linux. Sonar is based on Manjaro,
which is an Arch-based distro, and it does start with a talking
graphical environment, either MATE or GNOME, your choice. It has a very
similar rolling release model to Arch, but addes unstable, testing and
stable branches somewhat similar to Debian, but kept up-to-date with
the latest software. Perhaps this would be better for those who need a
talking graphical desktop.
Finally, I do wish to apologize for any e-mail I may have missed at the
TalkingArch support address. I do know that I missed some, and wasn't
able to answer some others in a timely manner. At this point, I believe
I'm the only one handling the support e-mail, so if your question went
unanswered, it was not due to a lack of interest in fixing a problem,
but possibly either an oversite on my part or a question for which I
was unable to find an answer. Perhaps the IRC channel would have solved
your problem more quickly, as there are more people who can help you.
#talkingarch at irc.netwirc.tk is always open, and you can even request
a CD image there. The entire aim of this channel is to be as fun and
friendly as possible, and to help you in any way we can. That said,
biters will be bitten back, as we do have an uncensored channel.
Therefore, if you want a fun and friendly place to hang out and to
discuss TalkingArch or anything else, feel free to drop in, but do be
friendly yourself in order to keep the temperature from rising too
high.
Sent from my something or other
_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

[Kyle]

Excuse me? Throw a tantrum? Did you see the e-mail to which I
responded, or are you simply responding to me because I was publically
slammed on this list for all I've tried to do without having seen the
slamming I received? The whole list was just told that I had no
interest in solving a problem that I probably could have fixed with a
bit more information and participation instead of the complaining and
tantrum throwing I saw. Thanks very little.
Sent from my piece of pie

[Tony Baechler]

Well, if you're talking about my email which started this thread, not once
did I mention you specifically. I, at the time, had no idea you were the
only one answering the support address. I also mentioned Gentoo in the same
post, so no, it wasn't singling you out. Please don't try turning things
around and saying I said something I didn't.

Post by Kyle
Excuse me? Throw a tantrum? Did you see the e-mail to which I
responded, or are you simply responding to me because I was publically
slammed on this list for all I've tried to do without having seen the
slamming I received? The whole list was just told that I had no
interest in solving a problem that I probably could have fixed with a
bit more information and participation instead of the complaining and
tantrum throwing I saw. Thanks very little.
Sent from my piece of pie
_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

[Michał Zegan]

He just said he is technically unable to fix it without help as he is
unable to reproduce the problem himself, or something similar.

Post by Littlefield, Tyler
This email seems more geared at being self defensive and passive
aggressive than it does in trying to fix the actual problems. Rather
than stating that you can but it probably won't happen, just state that
you can fix it provided help? There's no need to throw a tantrum.

Post by Kyle
First of all, if you had taken the time to have a look at the blog for
TalkingArch
https://blog.talkingarch.tk/
you would have seen the post where I specifically mentioned that an
older CD-sized image was still available, and how to request it. I
still don't know how Arch itself will handle being larger than 700MB,
which will likely happen by the end of the year, but I'm guessing they
will have similar requirements, possibly with no way to request a CD
copy. I do keep July's iso around, which is the last one under 700MB.
To be quite honest with you, I have only had one complaint about the
iso being larger than 700MB, and it comes from you, and is a complaint
about the image being too big for a CD instead of the expected request
for a smaller image. I have mentioned the size increases in several
places since April or May of this year, and have even tried to get
input from users, and all the input I have gotten until now indicated
that I should just go ahead and build the larger images, because no one
uses CD's that can't write to a flash drive or DVD instead. My
comaintainer did mention keeping around a smaller copy while it works,
so I have done this, providing a way to request this smaller copy if
needed. Although it hasn't yet been a month, I have absolutely 0
requests for a CD-sized copy of TalkingArch until you cited this as a
reason why you can't recommend it, which I must see as a baseless
complaint rather than a serious request for an image of a smaller size.
Regarding the sound problem on your specific card, I can probably fix
this if I have a little more information about the problem. On my
system, the emu10k1 driver works perfectly, and there is no problem
with the volume. So the problem appears to be specific to your card
rather than the driver itself. Given this, I will be unable to test
your device without your participation, and since you have as much as
said that you are not interested in Arch at all, I will be unable to
help you fix your specific problem, not due to a lack of interest on my
part, but due to your unwillingness to help test any fixes I may be
able to make, and my inability to test such fixes on my own.
Regarding brltty, I have no braille equipment, nor do I have any serial
speech synthesizer, so I am unable to test this either. My comaintainer
is able to work with braille, and I believe external speech as well, so
he may be able to help you, but then again, you have only complained
about the way we handle TalkingArch on a public list, and how much
better you feel Debian and Ubuntu are, rather than reporting a problem
in an attempt to get it fixed, so there's again probably little we can
do.
Regarding blind specific distros, I have just as much of a problem with
them as you, but TalkingArch is *only* the talking live image, and is
not a blind specific distro. Once you install TalkingArch, what you
actually end up with is Arch Linux, just as you would have had you
installed it from the Arch iso at https://archlinux.org/. This is
completely intentional, as we wanted it to be just as close to Arch
Linux in form and function as possible, and the installation process
should give you the real thing, not some sort of a blind specific
install, unless you perform the extra installation steps to get a
talking system. That said, I find it rather odd that you complain about
what we didn't fix soon enough for you in TalkingArch, and how bad you
think blind specific distros are, but then you turn right around and
say that you'll be making a talking Debian live CD that is essentially
TalkingArch for Debian with a single developer, specifically you,
because you think you can somehow do it better. Well, I guess that
means that we can't expect any participation from you at all, either in
making fixes or testing them. I do, however, wish you the best of luck
in your endeavor. Debian is indeed a good distro to work with, and I'm
sure it will serve you well.
Regarding TalkingArch not starting with a working graphical
environment, TalkingArch is not the only talking image available that
is based at least partially on Arch Linux. Sonar is based on Manjaro,
which is an Arch-based distro, and it does start with a talking
graphical environment, either MATE or GNOME, your choice. It has a very
similar rolling release model to Arch, but addes unstable, testing and
stable branches somewhat similar to Debian, but kept up-to-date with
the latest software. Perhaps this would be better for those who need a
talking graphical desktop.
Finally, I do wish to apologize for any e-mail I may have missed at the
TalkingArch support address. I do know that I missed some, and wasn't
able to answer some others in a timely manner. At this point, I believe
I'm the only one handling the support e-mail, so if your question went
unanswered, it was not due to a lack of interest in fixing a problem,
but possibly either an oversite on my part or a question for which I
was unable to find an answer. Perhaps the IRC channel would have solved
your problem more quickly, as there are more people who can help you.
#talkingarch at irc.netwirc.tk is always open, and you can even request
a CD image there. The entire aim of this channel is to be as fun and
friendly as possible, and to help you in any way we can. That said,
biters will be bitten back, as we do have an uncensored channel.
Therefore, if you want a fun and friendly place to hang out and to
discuss TalkingArch or anything else, feel free to drop in, but do be
friendly yourself in order to keep the temperature from rising too
high.
Sent from my something or other
_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

[Kyle]

For anyone interested, TalkingArch has a git repository at
git clone https://notabug.org/talkingarch/talkingarch.git
This should make it fairly easy to make patches. I can't guarantee that
I'll apply everything that comes in, but as long as it doesn't conflict
with the general principles of Arch Linux, then I'll be happy to review
and apply it. You can either send patches to the support e-mail
***@talkingarch.tk
or send me a request to pull from your own git repository, either via
the support e-mail or in the IRC channel. Keep in mind though that
anything applied to TalkingArch needs to pass tests in built images
before it can be a part of the TalkingArch iso. That said, I can and do
still respond to support questions as quickly as I can, and if I don't
know the specific answer, I will do my best to find it, either from
searching the web or by asking people who have/had similar issues. I'm
not the kind who will tell you to RTFM, which is what most people get
from the Debian and Arch lists. Unfortunately, however, I don't always
have all the answers, so it is very good to ask your questions in other
places such as this list, so that someone with the answer can help.
Sent from my whatsname

[Tony Baechler]

I'm changing the subject for clarity.

Post by Kyle
For anyone interested, TalkingArch has a git repository at
git clone https://notabug.org/talkingarch/talkingarch.git

Thanks for this. I'll definitely take a look. I was wondering how you
build the Talking Arch media, but knowing very little about Arch, I was
hesitant to ask. I'll definitely clone this.

[Tony Baechler]

I'm not going to quote Kyle's very long reply here, but I'll address the
highlights:

1. No, I wasn't complaining. I was simply pointing out observations. I
apologize if it came across as complaining, but I tried to keep things as
unbiased as possible.

2. My live CD is meant as a rescue CD since there currently isn't a Debian
rescue CD, let alone a talking one. One can install it to a hard drive if
they wish, but that's not the purpose. As I also mentioned but you failed
to address, Debian is eventually going to get this fixed and it will talk,
so there will be no need for my CD.

3. I was not complaining about or requesting CD media. Some people have
mentioned this and older machines might not have DVD readers. That's it.
Personally, I agree with you that CD media is probably no longer necessary.
My live CD is at the max of 700 MB now and is still missing packages I
want to add. I'm faced with the choice of freezing development or growing
to DVD media.

No, I won't join your IRC channel and no, I won't bother with the sound card
issue. It is a Sound Blaster Audigy and the issue has been fixed in Debian,
so borrow their ALSA configuration. I did read the blog before downloading
the CD image several months back. Eventually, I'll take another look at
Arch, but not for a while.

Finally, not once did I say Arch is bad or what you're doing is bad. I have
suggested Talking Arch a few times, but people weren't interested. For the
few people who only want the console for whatever reason, Arch is a good
alternative and I didn't say otherwise. I simply pointed out why I
personally can't recommend it. I look at several issues, such as what I
previously mentioned. There is no public bug tracker specific to Talking
Arch, there are only two developers, support email didn't get answered, etc.
That is understandable given the volunteer nature of the project, but does
unfortunately mean I can't recommend it to the masses. I'm never
close-minded, so when you feel this issues have been addressed, please post
here or contact me and I'll take another look.

[Kyle]

There is indeed a bug tracker for TalkingArch, and I even had
discussions with the lead developer of the website that holds the git
repository and bug tracker to address certain accessibility issues.
Take a look at
https://notabug.org/talkingarch/talkingarch/issues
You can report bugs there and send patches as well. This site is very
much like Github, but it is based entirely on free software, which
gives it a huge advantage. I happily recommend NotABug for hosting git
projects, especially because it is free forever MIT licensed software
with no crippled free version and uncrippled proprietary version, and
because it has a bug tracker included.

I did put this bug tracker along with all the other ways of contacting
the TalkingArch team on the "Contact us" page on the website, under the
"NotABug Issue Tracker" heading. There is currently 1 issue there, and
since I kinda forgot about that bug tracker myself, it is about a month
old. I am looking into this issue now, and will see what I can do to
fix it, although since it specifically involves wifi-menu, this may
involve forwarding the bug to the Arch people who maintain that
specific package. Please do not allow this miss to stop you from
reporting issues there, as I will check it much more often if people
are using it regularly.
Sent from my morning glory

[Karen Lewellen]

Just an aside on the cd media issue.
Perhaps you have not considered that Linux is not simply a north American
effort. additionally even in North America, a person just starting out
with Linux might get their hardware second hand. for example from any of
the many freecycle groups around the globe.
Those machines will still use cds, which is why they are second hand. You
can still purchase blank cd media as well.
So do you really want to prevent a person from trying this distribution if
they are starting at the bottom based on the thinking of those who have
used it for a while?
I am simply speaking in general here. If I were making this decision, I
would keep a cd simply because there can still be an audience for it.
Just my totally from the sidelines thought.
Karen

Post by Tony Baechler
I'm not going to quote Kyle's very long reply here, but I'll address the
1. No, I wasn't complaining. I was simply pointing out observations. I
apologize if it came across as complaining, but I tried to keep things as
unbiased as possible.
2. My live CD is meant as a rescue CD since there currently isn't a Debian
rescue CD, let alone a talking one. One can install it to a hard drive if
they wish, but that's not the purpose. As I also mentioned but you failed to
address, Debian is eventually going to get this fixed and it will talk, so
there will be no need for my CD.
3. I was not complaining about or requesting CD media. Some people have
mentioned this and older machines might not have DVD readers. That's it.
Personally, I agree with you that CD media is probably no longer necessary.
My live CD is at the max of 700 MB now and is still missing packages I
want to add. I'm faced with the choice of freezing development or growing to
DVD media.
No, I won't join your IRC channel and no, I won't bother with the sound card
issue. It is a Sound Blaster Audigy and the issue has been fixed in Debian,
so borrow their ALSA configuration. I did read the blog before downloading
the CD image several months back. Eventually, I'll take another look at
Arch, but not for a while.
Finally, not once did I say Arch is bad or what you're doing is bad. I have
suggested Talking Arch a few times, but people weren't interested. For the
few people who only want the console for whatever reason, Arch is a good
alternative and I didn't say otherwise. I simply pointed out why I
personally can't recommend it. I look at several issues, such as what I
previously mentioned. There is no public bug tracker specific to Talking
Arch, there are only two developers, support email didn't get answered, etc.
That is understandable given the volunteer nature of the project, but does
unfortunately mean I can't recommend it to the masses. I'm never
close-minded, so when you feel this issues have been addressed, please post
here or contact me and I'll take another look.
_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

[John G Heim]

Good point. I'd say perhaps that the real problem wouldn't be that
these machines have CD-ROM drives but rather that a lot of older
machines won't boot from a USB stick. My scanner machine is like that.
I have a linux machine with an ISA hardware speech synth and a SCSI
flatbed scanner attached and it won't boot from a thumb drive. I would
hate to give up that machine.


On the other hand, I think it is reasonable for the developers of
talking arch to say that they can't be all things to all people. You
will just have to use another flavor of linux.

Post by Karen Lewellen
Just an aside on the cd media issue.
Perhaps you have not considered that Linux is not simply a north
American effort. additionally even in North America, a person just
starting out with Linux might get their hardware second hand. for
example from any of the many freecycle groups around the globe.
Those machines will still use cds, which is why they are second hand.
You can still purchase blank cd media as well.
So do you really want to prevent a person from trying this distribution
if they are starting at the bottom based on the thinking of those who
have used it for a while?
I am simply speaking in general here. If I were making this decision, I
would keep a cd simply because there can still be an audience for it.
Just my totally from the sidelines thought.
Karen

Post by Tony Baechler
I'm not going to quote Kyle's very long reply here, but I'll address
1. No, I wasn't complaining. I was simply pointing out observations.
I apologize if it came across as complaining, but I tried to keep
things as unbiased as possible.
2. My live CD is meant as a rescue CD since there currently isn't a
Debian rescue CD, let alone a talking one. One can install it to a
hard drive if they wish, but that's not the purpose. As I also
mentioned but you failed to address, Debian is eventually going to get
this fixed and it will talk, so there will be no need for my CD.
3. I was not complaining about or requesting CD media. Some people
have mentioned this and older machines might not have DVD readers.
That's it. Personally, I agree with you that CD media is probably no
longer necessary.
My live CD is at the max of 700 MB now and is still missing packages
I want to add. I'm faced with the choice of freezing development or
growing to DVD media.
No, I won't join your IRC channel and no, I won't bother with the
sound card issue. It is a Sound Blaster Audigy and the issue has been
fixed in Debian, so borrow their ALSA configuration. I did read the
blog before downloading the CD image several months back. Eventually,
I'll take another look at Arch, but not for a while.
Finally, not once did I say Arch is bad or what you're doing is bad.
I have suggested Talking Arch a few times, but people weren't
interested. For the few people who only want the console for whatever
reason, Arch is a good alternative and I didn't say otherwise. I
simply pointed out why I personally can't recommend it. I look at
several issues, such as what I previously mentioned. There is no
public bug tracker specific to Talking Arch, there are only two
developers, support email didn't get answered, etc.
That is understandable given the volunteer nature of the project, but
does unfortunately mean I can't recommend it to the masses. I'm never
close-minded, so when you feel this issues have been addressed, please
post here or contact me and I'll take another look.
_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

[Karen Lewellen]

Why not?
The images already exist.
The usb stick booting issue is an even greater reason to keep the cd
option around.

i will give you another example.
I am not a braille user, and if one follows the numbers most individuals
experiencing sight loss are not using braille either.
Less than 8% or so are using braille.
However I would guess this flavor of Linux is designed to work with
braille, even if the majority of its users in theory might not use it, or
given the expense of a display, might not have access to it.
Factor in those individuals who use speech, but not braille, and who not
experience sight loss, but have a print disability..like dyslexia.
Given cd roms are far more common, and the majority of the computing
population who might desire accessibility might find one, how are the
developers serving the majority by not keeping this option available?
Imagine a person who really needed braille being told that the developers
cannot be
all things to all people?
Just a theoretical comparison.
You serve more people in theory by keeping the cd images as an option than
not if that makes sense.
Again Just my thoughts,
Karen

Good point. I'd say perhaps that the real problem wouldn't be that these
machines have CD-ROM drives but rather that a lot of older machines won't
boot from a USB stick. My scanner machine is like that. I have a linux
machine with an ISA hardware speech synth and a SCSI flatbed scanner attached
and it won't boot from a thumb drive. I would hate to give up that machine.
On the other hand, I think it is reasonable for the developers of talking
arch to say that they can't be all things to all people. You will just have
to use another flavor of linux.

Post by Karen Lewellen
Just an aside on the cd media issue.
Perhaps you have not considered that Linux is not simply a north
American effort. additionally even in North America, a person just
starting out with Linux might get their hardware second hand. for
example from any of the many freecycle groups around the globe.
Those machines will still use cds, which is why they are second hand.
You can still purchase blank cd media as well.
So do you really want to prevent a person from trying this distribution
if they are starting at the bottom based on the thinking of those who
have used it for a while?
I am simply speaking in general here. If I were making this decision, I
would keep a cd simply because there can still be an audience for it.
Just my totally from the sidelines thought.
Karen

Post by Tony Baechler
I'm not going to quote Kyle's very long reply here, but I'll address
1. No, I wasn't complaining. I was simply pointing out observations.
I apologize if it came across as complaining, but I tried to keep
things as unbiased as possible.
2. My live CD is meant as a rescue CD since there currently isn't a
Debian rescue CD, let alone a talking one. One can install it to a
hard drive if they wish, but that's not the purpose. As I also
mentioned but you failed to address, Debian is eventually going to get
this fixed and it will talk, so there will be no need for my CD.
3. I was not complaining about or requesting CD media. Some people
have mentioned this and older machines might not have DVD readers.
That's it. Personally, I agree with you that CD media is probably no
longer necessary.
My live CD is at the max of 700 MB now and is still missing packages
I want to add. I'm faced with the choice of freezing development or
growing to DVD media.
No, I won't join your IRC channel and no, I won't bother with the
sound card issue. It is a Sound Blaster Audigy and the issue has been
fixed in Debian, so borrow their ALSA configuration. I did read the
blog before downloading the CD image several months back. Eventually,
I'll take another look at Arch, but not for a while.
Finally, not once did I say Arch is bad or what you're doing is bad.
I have suggested Talking Arch a few times, but people weren't
interested. For the few people who only want the console for whatever
reason, Arch is a good alternative and I didn't say otherwise. I
simply pointed out why I personally can't recommend it. I look at
several issues, such as what I previously mentioned. There is no
public bug tracker specific to Talking Arch, there are only two
developers, support email didn't get answered, etc.
That is understandable given the volunteer nature of the project, but
does unfortunately mean I can't recommend it to the masses. I'm never
close-minded, so when you feel this issues have been addressed, please
post here or contact me and I'll take another look.
_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

--
_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

[John G Heim]

I am going to guess that you didn't really intend to ask me why a
developer can't be all things to all people. That, obviously, would be
impossible. But going on what I take to be the intent of your question,
I'm going to say that we all need to keep in mind that the developers
are volunteers. They have a right to decide for themselves what the best
use of their time is.

You say, "Imagine a person who really needed braille being told that the
developers cannot be all things to all people" as if that is obviously
wrong. But it's not. It would depend on how hard it is to include
braille support.

An ethical developer does his best to listen to constructive criticism.
He does his best not to exclude anyone. But there is a nearly infinite
call on his time. I am guessing you haven't gotten into volunteering as
a developer, right? There is no limit to the number of requests you'll
get. No matter how hard you work, someone will ask for more. In fact,
I'd say the better job you do, the more likely it is that you'll be
asked for more.

Post by Karen Lewellen
Why not?
The images already exist.
The usb stick booting issue is an even greater reason to keep the cd
option around.
i will give you another example.
I am not a braille user, and if one follows the numbers most
individuals experiencing sight loss are not using braille either.
Less than 8% or so are using braille.
However I would guess this flavor of Linux is designed to work with
braille, even if the majority of its users in theory might not use it,
or given the expense of a display, might not have access to it.
Factor in those individuals who use speech, but not braille, and who not
experience sight loss, but have a print disability..like dyslexia.
Given cd roms are far more common, and the majority of the computing
population who might desire accessibility might find one, how are the
developers serving the majority by not keeping this option available?
Imagine a person who really needed braille being told that the
developers cannot be all things to all people?
Just a theoretical comparison.
You serve more people in theory by keeping the cd images as an option
than not if that makes sense.
Again Just my thoughts,
Karen

Post by John G Heim
Good point. I'd say perhaps that the real problem wouldn't be that
these machines have CD-ROM drives but rather that a lot of older
machines won't boot from a USB stick. My scanner machine is like
that. I have a linux machine with an ISA hardware speech synth and a
SCSI flatbed scanner attached and it won't boot from a thumb drive. I
would hate to give up that machine.
On the other hand, I think it is reasonable for the developers of
talking arch to say that they can't be all things to all people. You
will just have to use another flavor of linux.

Post by Karen Lewellen
Just an aside on the cd media issue.
Perhaps you have not considered that Linux is not simply a north
American effort. additionally even in North America, a person just
starting out with Linux might get their hardware second hand. for
example from any of the many freecycle groups around the globe.
Those machines will still use cds, which is why they are second hand.
You can still purchase blank cd media as well.
So do you really want to prevent a person from trying this distribution
if they are starting at the bottom based on the thinking of those who
have used it for a while?
I am simply speaking in general here. If I were making this decision, I
would keep a cd simply because there can still be an audience for it.
Just my totally from the sidelines thought.
Karen

Post by Tony Baechler
I'm not going to quote Kyle's very long reply here, but I'll address

Post by Tony Baechler
1. No, I wasn't complaining. I was simply pointing out

observations.

Post by Tony Baechler
I apologize if it came across as complaining, but I tried to keep
things as unbiased as possible.

Post by Tony Baechler
2. My live CD is meant as a rescue CD since there currently isn't a

Debian rescue CD, let alone a talking one. One can install it to a
hard drive if they wish, but that's not the purpose. As I also
mentioned but you failed to address, Debian is eventually going to

get

Post by Tony Baechler
this fixed and it will talk, so there will be no need for my CD.

Post by Tony Baechler
3. I was not complaining about or requesting CD media. Some people

have mentioned this and older machines might not have DVD readers.
That's it. Personally, I agree with you that CD media is probably no
longer necessary.
My live CD is at the max of 700 MB now and is still missing packages
I want to add. I'm faced with the choice of freezing development or
growing to DVD media.

Post by Tony Baechler
No, I won't join your IRC channel and no, I won't bother with the

sound card issue. It is a Sound Blaster Audigy and the issue has

been

Post by Tony Baechler
fixed in Debian, so borrow their ALSA configuration. I did read the
blog before downloading the CD image several months back.

Eventually,

Post by Tony Baechler
I'll take another look at Arch, but not for a while.

Post by Tony Baechler
Finally, not once did I say Arch is bad or what you're doing is

bad.

Post by Tony Baechler
I have suggested Talking Arch a few times, but people weren't
interested. For the few people who only want the console for

whatever

Post by Tony Baechler
reason, Arch is a good alternative and I didn't say otherwise. I
simply pointed out why I personally can't recommend it. I look at
several issues, such as what I previously mentioned. There is no
public bug tracker specific to Talking Arch, there are only two
developers, support email didn't get answered, etc.
That is understandable given the volunteer nature of the project,

but

Post by Tony Baechler
does unfortunately mean I can't recommend it to the masses. I'm

never

Post by Tony Baechler
close-minded, so when you feel this issues have been addressed,

please

Post by Tony Baechler
post here or contact me and I'll take another look.

Post by Tony Baechler
_______________________________________________

Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

--
_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

[Kyle]

There are two of us who work on TalkingArch. The development is
certainly open for others to come onboard, provided that we can all
agree that TalkingArch *must* remain as close to pure Arch as possible,
with only speech and braille support added, along with a couple of
things that aid in reading the documentation. In any case, what comes
out of a TalkingArch installation must be exactly the same as what one
would get by installing Arch from the pure Arch iso, unless a talking
system is needed, in which case, we provide steps on the wiki that will
make this happen. Braille testing and help is certainly needed, as only
one of us has the ability to test braille support, and it's possible
that Kelly, the developer with the ability to test braille, has a
limited supply of braille devices on which to test the braille support
in TalkingArch. He does maintain the brltty-minimal package that
TalkingArch uses from the AUR, so if any tweaking of its configuration
is needed, he can probably help, although I don't think we ship a
custom config file. I believe only the PKGBUILD is tweaked to make the
brltty-minimal package require as few dependencies as possible, while
still working with as many devices as possible, even the old ones,
which many people still have, owing to the extremely high cost of
purchasing a braille display. Any help with testing or patching this
package is greatly appreciated, and as long as it doesn't interfere
with the functionality we currently have, it will most likely be
accepted into either the brltty-minimal package or the TalkingArch
build system, and working images will be signed off by both of us as
usual.

I can assure you that there is no crazy prioritization of bugs going on
here, with the exception of the fact that TalkingArch must be Arch with
speech and braille, nothing more, nothing less. As always, bugs and
fixes are accepted in any number of ways, all of which are listed at
https://talkingarch.tk/contact.php
Anyone is also more than welcome to clone the repository and help with
development from there. We have no formal application process for
TalkingArch development, only express an interest and submit acceptable
work. Eventually, volunteers who submit work that we can include may be
invited to participate in the development process, including gaining
push access to the git repository for the build system. Also, since the
AUR now allows multiple maintainers, it may also be possible to add
people to the brltty-minimal repository as well, but since Kelly
handles that, it may be better to ask him directly about that. Hope all
this helps.
Sent from my violin

[Karen Lewellen]

Why yes, in part my question was rhetorical.
However, I do not understand the volunteer factor at all.
Perhaps I am an innocent, but the individuals spending time on this
software freely by choice are doing this so that someone other than
themselves can make
use of their work.
Is not this the case?
Otherwise, you could perfectly well play with the programs at your house for
your own use, and subject to only your own ideas of functionality.
If my guess is correct, the individuals willingly volunteering intend for
someone to
use the program, then does it not logically follow that those others, using
their own computers, unique in how they learn...because all humans are
different, will share the results of their efforts?
certainly if your work is quality, many will praise your abilities by
supporting your work by using it...and as they bring in their individual
ways of using the software, they will ask for more.
all of this, at least to me as an outsider seems sort of apparent if you
are going to create software, and share it with anyone.
My point is that I do not understand why the volunteer factor carries any
weight...the nature of volunteering is freedom of choice...is not that
true? If you do not wish your work subjected to public expecting, and
requests for improvement, why share it at all?
Again just curious,

I am going to guess that you didn't really intend to ask me why a developer
can't be all things to all people. That, obviously, would be impossible. But
going on what I take to be the intent of your question, I'm going to say that
we all need to keep in mind that the developers are volunteers. They have a
right to decide for themselves what the best use of their time is.
You say, "Imagine a person who really needed braille being told that the
developers cannot be all things to all people" as if that is obviously wrong.
But it's not. It would depend on how hard it is to include braille support.
An ethical developer does his best to listen to constructive criticism. He
does his best not to exclude anyone. But there is a nearly infinite call on
his time. I am guessing you haven't gotten into volunteering as a developer,
right? There is no limit to the number of requests you'll get. No matter how
hard you work, someone will ask for more. In fact, I'd say the better job you
do, the more likely it is that you'll be asked for more.

Post by Karen Lewellen
Why not?
The images already exist.
The usb stick booting issue is an even greater reason to keep the cd
option around.
i will give you another example.
I am not a braille user, and if one follows the numbers most
individuals experiencing sight loss are not using braille either.
Less than 8% or so are using braille.
However I would guess this flavor of Linux is designed to work with
braille, even if the majority of its users in theory might not use it,
or given the expense of a display, might not have access to it.
Factor in those individuals who use speech, but not braille, and who not
experience sight loss, but have a print disability..like dyslexia.
Given cd roms are far more common, and the majority of the computing
population who might desire accessibility might find one, how are the
developers serving the majority by not keeping this option available?
Imagine a person who really needed braille being told that the
developers cannot be all things to all people?
Just a theoretical comparison.
You serve more people in theory by keeping the cd images as an option
than not if that makes sense.
Again Just my thoughts,
Karen

Post by John G Heim
Good point. I'd say perhaps that the real problem wouldn't be that
these machines have CD-ROM drives but rather that a lot of older
machines won't boot from a USB stick. My scanner machine is like
that. I have a linux machine with an ISA hardware speech synth and a
SCSI flatbed scanner attached and it won't boot from a thumb drive. I
would hate to give up that machine.
On the other hand, I think it is reasonable for the developers of
talking arch to say that they can't be all things to all people. You
will just have to use another flavor of linux.

Post by Karen Lewellen
Just an aside on the cd media issue.
Perhaps you have not considered that Linux is not simply a north
American effort. additionally even in North America, a person just
starting out with Linux might get their hardware second hand. for
example from any of the many freecycle groups around the globe.
Those machines will still use cds, which is why they are second hand.
You can still purchase blank cd media as well.
So do you really want to prevent a person from trying this distribution
if they are starting at the bottom based on the thinking of those who
have used it for a while?
I am simply speaking in general here. If I were making this decision, I
would keep a cd simply because there can still be an audience for it.
Just my totally from the sidelines thought.
Karen

Post by Tony Baechler
I'm not going to quote Kyle's very long reply here, but I'll address

Post by Tony Baechler
1. No, I wasn't complaining. I was simply pointing out

observations.

Post by Tony Baechler
I apologize if it came across as complaining, but I tried to keep
things as unbiased as possible.

Post by Tony Baechler
2. My live CD is meant as a rescue CD since there currently isn't a

Debian rescue CD, let alone a talking one. One can install it to a
hard drive if they wish, but that's not the purpose. As I also
mentioned but you failed to address, Debian is eventually going to

get

Post by Tony Baechler
this fixed and it will talk, so there will be no need for my CD.

Post by Tony Baechler
3. I was not complaining about or requesting CD media. Some people

have mentioned this and older machines might not have DVD readers.
That's it. Personally, I agree with you that CD media is probably no
longer necessary.
My live CD is at the max of 700 MB now and is still missing packages
I want to add. I'm faced with the choice of freezing development or
growing to DVD media.

Post by Tony Baechler
No, I won't join your IRC channel and no, I won't bother with the

sound card issue. It is a Sound Blaster Audigy and the issue has

been

Post by Tony Baechler
fixed in Debian, so borrow their ALSA configuration. I did read the
blog before downloading the CD image several months back.

Eventually,

Post by Tony Baechler
I'll take another look at Arch, but not for a while.

Post by Tony Baechler
Finally, not once did I say Arch is bad or what you're doing is

bad.

Post by Tony Baechler
I have suggested Talking Arch a few times, but people weren't
interested. For the few people who only want the console for

whatever

Post by Tony Baechler
reason, Arch is a good alternative and I didn't say otherwise. I
simply pointed out why I personally can't recommend it. I look at
several issues, such as what I previously mentioned. There is no
public bug tracker specific to Talking Arch, there are only two
developers, support email didn't get answered, etc.
That is understandable given the volunteer nature of the project,

but

Post by Tony Baechler
does unfortunately mean I can't recommend it to the masses. I'm

never

Post by Tony Baechler
close-minded, so when you feel this issues have been addressed,

please

Post by Tony Baechler
post here or contact me and I'll take another look.

Post by Tony Baechler
_______________________________________________

Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

--
_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

--
_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

[Chris Brannon]

Post by Karen Lewellen
Perhaps I am an innocent, but the individuals spending time on this
software freely by choice are doing this so that someone other than
themselves can make use of their work.
Is not this the case?
Otherwise, you could perfectly well play with the programs at your
house for your own use, and subject to only your own ideas of
functionality.

Nope. You're working under the incorrect assumption that all free
software is written out of a spirit of altruism by a bunch of nice
people who just want to give away free stuff. Yes, sometimes that is the
case, but in fact, there are a lot of reasons why free software is
written. I'd argue that one of the biggest is that it scratches a
developer's itch. In other words, someone with the skills needs
something, so they write it. It serves its purpose for them, so they
decide to share it, hoping that someone else will find it useful. After
all, it's not nice to keep your toys all to yourself, is it? Chances
are that if you've scratched an itch, someone else is going to have the
exact same itch. Being a basically virtuous person, it behooves you
to post your work on the net, so that the next person can derive some
advantage from it. None of this involves *pure* altruism.

Actually, that's how Talking Arch got started in the first place. I
needed it, so I built it. Since I went to all that trouble, I did the
next logical thing and put it up on the net. I made it pretty clear
over the years that I was scratching a personal itch. However, if
someone asked for something, I did my very best to give them what they
wanted. Braille is a case in point. For most of my life, I haven't
even had access to a braille display. They're too expensive. Right
now, I do have access to Deedra's, but it has a few broken cells on
it. Anyway, when I added braille support to talking Arch back in 2010
or so, it was because somebody else asked me nicely and was willing to
test a pre-release image that I made for them. Considering that I was
just "scratching an itch", I was by no means obligated to do it. I did
it because of my personal philosophy. Basically it's mutual aid. Also,
sometimes I like to pretend to be a nice guy, when I'm not pretending to
be a bad boy. I've rarely pretended to be a charity worker, even though
the world could use more charity.
I'm not involved with Talking Arch anymore, so I don't know what
motivates the current developers. Maybe they'd like to speak up, or
not.

No, I'm not knocking altruism at all. It's a beautiful thing. I'm sure
there are very many developers who give their time and efforts to free
software out of the purest of motives. They may feel a great sense of
obligation toward their users, but at the end of the day, they also have
to decide how best to spend their effort. And sometimes, this means
that some user needs are going to go unsatisfied.

-- Chris

[Glenn]

Chris,
I think some folks do the open source work for vocational advancement.]
It looks good on a resume.]
Glenn
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Brannon" <***@the-brannons.com>
To: "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux."
<***@linux-speakup.org>
Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2015 12:20 AM
Subject: Re: Why I can't recommend Arch or Gentoo

Post by Karen Lewellen
Perhaps I am an innocent, but the individuals spending time on this
software freely by choice are doing this so that someone other than
themselves can make use of their work.
Is not this the case?
Otherwise, you could perfectly well play with the programs at your
house for your own use, and subject to only your own ideas of
functionality.

Nope. You're working under the incorrect assumption that all free
software is written out of a spirit of altruism by a bunch of nice
people who just want to give away free stuff. Yes, sometimes that is the
case, but in fact, there are a lot of reasons why free software is
written. I'd argue that one of the biggest is that it scratches a
developer's itch. In other words, someone with the skills needs
something, so they write it. It serves its purpose for them, so they
decide to share it, hoping that someone else will find it useful. After
all, it's not nice to keep your toys all to yourself, is it? Chances
are that if you've scratched an itch, someone else is going to have the
exact same itch. Being a basically virtuous person, it behooves you
to post your work on the net, so that the next person can derive some
advantage from it. None of this involves *pure* altruism.

Actually, that's how Talking Arch got started in the first place. I
needed it, so I built it. Since I went to all that trouble, I did the
next logical thing and put it up on the net. I made it pretty clear
over the years that I was scratching a personal itch. However, if
someone asked for something, I did my very best to give them what they
wanted. Braille is a case in point. For most of my life, I haven't
even had access to a braille display. They're too expensive. Right
now, I do have access to Deedra's, but it has a few broken cells on
it. Anyway, when I added braille support to talking Arch back in 2010
or so, it was because somebody else asked me nicely and was willing to
test a pre-release image that I made for them. Considering that I was
just "scratching an itch", I was by no means obligated to do it. I did
it because of my personal philosophy. Basically it's mutual aid. Also,
sometimes I like to pretend to be a nice guy, when I'm not pretending to
be a bad boy. I've rarely pretended to be a charity worker, even though
the world could use more charity.
I'm not involved with Talking Arch anymore, so I don't know what
motivates the current developers. Maybe they'd like to speak up, or
not.

No, I'm not knocking altruism at all. It's a beautiful thing. I'm sure
there are very many developers who give their time and efforts to free
software out of the purest of motives. They may feel a great sense of
obligation toward their users, but at the end of the day, they also have
to decide how best to spend their effort. And sometimes, this means
that some user needs are going to go unsatisfied.

-- Chris
_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
***@linux-speakup.org
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

[Nick Giannak III]

Oh Karen, if only the wider world had your common sense.
I have lurked on this list for many years, back when I used to have fun with Speakup and linux and an Accent SA. The shine came off that system for me years ago, but it wouldn’t be the last time I worked with a volunteer project.
The prevailing thought process amongst this kind of project is the following. “I designed this project for my own personal use, I decide what comes next.” The guy won’t implement anything that is different to his own workflow, even if a dominant number of his users asks for it. Never mind what happens if he finds himself in a bind and needs help, he doesn’t think this way and continues the slow alienation of his user base. And we except it, after all, it’s volunteer software, right?

Post by Karen Lewellen
Why yes, in part my question was rhetorical.
However, I do not understand the volunteer factor at all.
Perhaps I am an innocent, but the individuals spending time on this software freely by choice are doing this so that someone other than themselves can make use of their work.
Is not this the case?
Otherwise, you could perfectly well play with the programs at your house for your own use, and subject to only your own ideas of functionality.
If my guess is correct, the individuals willingly volunteering intend for someone to use the program, then does it not logically follow that those others, using their own computers, unique in how they learn...because all humans are different, will share the results of their efforts?
certainly if your work is quality, many will praise your abilities by supporting your work by using it...and as they bring in their individual ways of using the software, they will ask for more.
all of this, at least to me as an outsider seems sort of apparent if you are going to create software, and share it with anyone.
My point is that I do not understand why the volunteer factor carries any weight...the nature of volunteering is freedom of choice...is not that true? If you do not wish your work subjected to public expecting, and requests for improvement, why share it at all?
Again just curious,

I am going to guess that you didn't really intend to ask me why a developer can't be all things to all people. That, obviously, would be impossible. But going on what I take to be the intent of your question, I'm going to say that we all need to keep in mind that the developers are volunteers. They have a right to decide for themselves what the best use of their time is.
You say, "Imagine a person who really needed braille being told that the developers cannot be all things to all people" as if that is obviously wrong. But it's not. It would depend on how hard it is to include braille support.
An ethical developer does his best to listen to constructive criticism. He does his best not to exclude anyone. But there is a nearly infinite call on his time. I am guessing you haven't gotten into volunteering as a developer, right? There is no limit to the number of requests you'll get. No matter how hard you work, someone will ask for more. In fact, I'd say the better job you do, the more likely it is that you'll be asked for more.

Post by Karen Lewellen
Why not?
The images already exist.
The usb stick booting issue is an even greater reason to keep the cd
option around.
i will give you another example.
I am not a braille user, and if one follows the numbers most
individuals experiencing sight loss are not using braille either.
Less than 8% or so are using braille.
However I would guess this flavor of Linux is designed to work with
braille, even if the majority of its users in theory might not use it,
or given the expense of a display, might not have access to it.
Factor in those individuals who use speech, but not braille, and who not
experience sight loss, but have a print disability..like dyslexia.
Given cd roms are far more common, and the majority of the computing
population who might desire accessibility might find one, how are the
developers serving the majority by not keeping this option available?
Imagine a person who really needed braille being told that the
developers cannot be all things to all people?
Just a theoretical comparison.
You serve more people in theory by keeping the cd images as an option
than not if that makes sense.
Again Just my thoughts,
Karen

Post by John G Heim
Good point. I'd say perhaps that the real problem wouldn't be that
these machines have CD-ROM drives but rather that a lot of older
machines won't boot from a USB stick. My scanner machine is like
that. I have a linux machine with an ISA hardware speech synth and a
SCSI flatbed scanner attached and it won't boot from a thumb drive. I
would hate to give up that machine.

Post by Karen Lewellen

Post by John G Heim
On the other hand, I think it is reasonable for the developers of

talking arch to say that they can't be all things to all people. You
will just have to use another flavor of linux.

Post by Karen Lewellen
Just an aside on the cd media issue.
Perhaps you have not considered that Linux is not simply a north
American effort. additionally even in North America, a person just
starting out with Linux might get their hardware second hand. for
example from any of the many freecycle groups around the globe.
Those machines will still use cds, which is why they are second hand.
You can still purchase blank cd media as well.
So do you really want to prevent a person from trying this > > distribution
if they are starting at the bottom based on the thinking of those who
have used it for a while?
I am simply speaking in general here. If I were making this decision, I
would keep a cd simply because there can still be an audience for > > it.
Just my totally from the sidelines thought.
Karen

Post by John G Heim

Post by Tony Baechler

I'm not going to quote Kyle's very long reply here, but I'll > > > address

1. No, I wasn't complaining. I was simply pointing out

observations.

Post by John G Heim
I apologize if it came across as complaining, but I tried to keep
things as unbiased as possible.

Post by Tony Baechler
2. My live CD is meant as a rescue CD since there currently isn't > > > > a

Debian rescue CD, let alone a talking one. One can install it to a
hard drive if they wish, but that's not the purpose. As I also
mentioned but you failed to address, Debian is eventually going to

get

Post by John G Heim
this fixed and it will talk, so there will be no need for my CD.

Post by Tony Baechler
3. I was not complaining about or requesting CD media. Some > > > > people

have mentioned this and older machines might not have DVD readers.
That's it. Personally, I agree with you that CD media is probably > > > no
longer necessary.
My live CD is at the max of 700 MB now and is still missing > > > packages
I want to add. I'm faced with the choice of freezing development > > > or
growing to DVD media.

Post by Tony Baechler
No, I won't join your IRC channel and no, I won't bother with the

sound card issue. It is a Sound Blaster Audigy and the issue has

been

Post by John G Heim
fixed in Debian, so borrow their ALSA configuration. I did read > > > the
blog before downloading the CD image several months back.

Eventually,

Post by John G Heim
I'll take another look at Arch, but not for a while.

Post by Tony Baechler
Finally, not once did I say Arch is bad or what you're doing is

bad.

Post by John G Heim
I have suggested Talking Arch a few times, but people weren't
interested. For the few people who only want the console for

whatever

Post by John G Heim
reason, Arch is a good alternative and I didn't say otherwise. I
simply pointed out why I personally can't recommend it. I look at
several issues, such as what I previously mentioned. There is no
public bug tracker specific to Talking Arch, there are only two
developers, support email didn't get answered, etc.
That is understandable given the volunteer nature of the project,

but

Post by John G Heim
does unfortunately mean I can't recommend it to the masses. I'm

never

Post by John G Heim
close-minded, so when you feel this issues have been addressed,

please

Post by John G Heim
post here or contact me and I'll take another look.

Post by Tony Baechler
_______________________________________________

Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Post by Tony Baechler

Post by Tony Baechler
_______________________________________________

Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup
--

_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

--
_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

[Kelly Prescott]

Ok, I now have the time to respond to this thread...
Echoing some of the things others have said, here I go!

1: I like Kyle am a vollenteer maintainer of the TalkingArch
distribution.

2: I share his vision of keeping it is close to the original arch as
possible. We are not seeking to make another distribution, rather we are
seeking to make a distribution experience which is as close to the
original as possible.

3: I realize that this is not all things to all people. If this isn't
your distro of choice, I totally understand and there are several others
from which you can choose or you can make another one to match your
particular needs/desires.

4. Also like Kyle, I am always willing to help when I can.
I do better responding to the mailing list for 2 reasons. The first is I
want my answers archived so future users might find them should they need
them, and secondly I have a busy professional life which makes this the
easiest medium at present for me.

5. I am perfectly willing to help fix support issues particularly in the
braille side of things, and I have 2 displays at present, a Hims Braille
Edge 40 and a pacmate 40 cell display.
This does, limit my options, but I do what I can.

6: Mention was made of changing the serial detection of brltty in the
distro, and We might be able to do that, but I am reluctant to change the
packages I use as I don't want them to differ from the distributed ones.
The only mods I make at present are to strip out some of the XWindows and
API stuff so it will be a smaller package for the ISO.

7: As we move forward, change is are bound to happen. Even the regular
Arch developers are struggling with the fact that the distro is going to
no longer fit on a CDRom.
We could strip out the braille support, but this would take out braille as
a installation option and the main stream arch iso will go over the CD
size probably by the end of the year anyway. We still offer the cd on
request as a option, so no one is left out.

8: as for developer motivation, mine works like this. I want a
blind-friendly command-line distribution I can use. I also want to help
other like-minded persons discover the command-line and learn Linux.
I am not trying to rid the world of Windows per say, but I do enjoy seeing
people learn more about the software and hardware they use.
I also enjoy seeing people switch to free software options.
It is all about choice!

I hope everyone has a wonderful day!
-- Kelly Prescott

[Al Sten-Clanton]

Because I'm curious and peresently an Arch user, what has caused the
Arch installation image size to grow beyond the capacity of a CD? Thanks!

Al

Post by Kelly Prescott
Ok, I now have the time to respond to this thread...
Echoing some of the things others have said, here I go!
1: I like Kyle am a vollenteer maintainer of the TalkingArch distribution.
2: I share his vision of keeping it is close to the original arch as
possible. We are not seeking to make another distribution, rather we
are seeking to make a distribution experience which is as close to the
original as possible.
3: I realize that this is not all things to all people. If this isn't
your distro of choice, I totally understand and there are several others
from which you can choose or you can make another one to match your
particular needs/desires.
4. Also like Kyle, I am always willing to help when I can.
I do better responding to the mailing list for 2 reasons. The first is
I want my answers archived so future users might find them should they
need them, and secondly I have a busy professional life which makes this
the easiest medium at present for me.
5. I am perfectly willing to help fix support issues particularly in
the braille side of things, and I have 2 displays at present, a Hims
Braille Edge 40 and a pacmate 40 cell display.
This does, limit my options, but I do what I can.
6: Mention was made of changing the serial detection of brltty in the
distro, and We might be able to do that, but I am reluctant to change
the packages I use as I don't want them to differ from the distributed
ones.
The only mods I make at present are to strip out some of the XWindows
and API stuff so it will be a smaller package for the ISO.
7: As we move forward, change is are bound to happen. Even the regular
Arch developers are struggling with the fact that the distro is going to
no longer fit on a CDRom.
We could strip out the braille support, but this would take out braille
as a installation option and the main stream arch iso will go over the
CD size probably by the end of the year anyway. We still offer the cd on
request as a option, so no one is left out.
8: as for developer motivation, mine works like this. I want a
blind-friendly command-line distribution I can use. I also want to help
other like-minded persons discover the command-line and learn Linux.
I am not trying to rid the world of Windows per say, but I do enjoy
seeing people learn more about the software and hardware they use.
I also enjoy seeing people switch to free software options.
It is all about choice!
I hope everyone has a wonderful day!
-- Kelly Prescott
_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

[Kyle]

The first thing that caused Arch Linux to grow significantly was the
migration from two single-architecture images, one for x86 and the
other for x86_64, to a single dual-architecture image that can boot on
any of the two machine types. This happened I believe in 2012, and
caused the CD to grow from a bit over 200MB to well over 450MB.
TalkingArch, because of the brltty package, grew even more, as many
dependencies are added even with the minimal package we have. Chris was
still working on TalkingArch at that time. By the time Kelly and I took
over the project, the size had grown to nearly 550MB, and has now
topped 700MB. This is largely due to upgrades in the base packages,
which usually add just a little size over time as code complexity
increases. However, the small size increases double on Arch, because
every time one package grows, it actually grows twice on the same iso,
once for i686 and again for x86_64. TalkingArch, like Arch Linux
itself, stores two of nearly everything, due to the dual-architecture
format, which is why even 1MB of growth in a single package is nearly
2MB on the iso. TalkingArch was simply the first to break the 700MB
size limitation of a CD, because it has more packages. Hope this helps
explain things.
Sent from my isobox

[Al Sten-Clanton]

Thanks for that info.

sent from my wife's birthday cake

Post by Kyle
The first thing that caused Arch Linux to grow significantly was the
migration from two single-architecture images, one for x86 and the
other for x86_64, to a single dual-architecture image that can boot on
any of the two machine types. This happened I believe in 2012, and
caused the CD to grow from a bit over 200MB to well over 450MB.
TalkingArch, because of the brltty package, grew even more, as many
dependencies are added even with the minimal package we have. Chris was
still working on TalkingArch at that time. By the time Kelly and I took
over the project, the size had grown to nearly 550MB, and has now
topped 700MB. This is largely due to upgrades in the base packages,
which usually add just a little size over time as code complexity
increases. However, the small size increases double on Arch, because
every time one package grows, it actually grows twice on the same iso,
once for i686 and again for x86_64. TalkingArch, like Arch Linux
itself, stores two of nearly everything, due to the dual-architecture
format, which is why even 1MB of growth in a single package is nearly
2MB on the iso. TalkingArch was simply the first to break the 700MB
size limitation of a CD, because it has more packages. Hope this helps
explain things.
Sent from my isobox
_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

[John G Heim]

I used to maintain a blind-friendly version of grml. It included a
kernel with the kernel patched to work with hardware speech synths, some
udev rules to recognize the synths and start speakup automatically, and
stuff like that. At one point, the grml developers switched the type of
compression they used on their ISO and I literally couldn't remaster
their ISO. Grml is based on debian but the compression algorythm (lzh?)
wasn't supported in the debian kernel. It wasn't just a flag in the
kernel, you had to patch some code, etc. Anyway, it would have been a
huge amount of work and I just didn't have the time. Boy, you should
have seen the angry email I got when I said I would get to upgrading my
fork when I had the time. Of course, the thing is, the angry emails only
made me less inclined to burn my own time helping the blind community.

Post by Kelly Prescott
Ok, I now have the time to respond to this thread...
Echoing some of the things others have said, here I go!
1: I like Kyle am a vollenteer maintainer of the TalkingArch distribution.
2: I share his vision of keeping it is close to the original arch as
possible. We are not seeking to make another distribution, rather we
are seeking to make a distribution experience which is as close to the
original as possible.
3: I realize that this is not all things to all people. If this isn't
your distro of choice, I totally understand and there are several others
from which you can choose or you can make another one to match your
particular needs/desires.
4. Also like Kyle, I am always willing to help when I can.
I do better responding to the mailing list for 2 reasons. The first is
I want my answers archived so future users might find them should they
need them, and secondly I have a busy professional life which makes this
the easiest medium at present for me.
5. I am perfectly willing to help fix support issues particularly in
the braille side of things, and I have 2 displays at present, a Hims
Braille Edge 40 and a pacmate 40 cell display.
This does, limit my options, but I do what I can.
6: Mention was made of changing the serial detection of brltty in the
distro, and We might be able to do that, but I am reluctant to change
the packages I use as I don't want them to differ from the distributed
ones.
The only mods I make at present are to strip out some of the XWindows
and API stuff so it will be a smaller package for the ISO.
7: As we move forward, change is are bound to happen. Even the regular
Arch developers are struggling with the fact that the distro is going to
no longer fit on a CDRom.
We could strip out the braille support, but this would take out braille
as a installation option and the main stream arch iso will go over the
CD size probably by the end of the year anyway. We still offer the cd on
request as a option, so no one is left out.
8: as for developer motivation, mine works like this. I want a
blind-friendly command-line distribution I can use. I also want to help
other like-minded persons discover the command-line and learn Linux.
I am not trying to rid the world of Windows per say, but I do enjoy
seeing people learn more about the software and hardware they use.
I also enjoy seeing people switch to free software options.
It is all about choice!
I hope everyone has a wonderful day!
-- Kelly Prescott
_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

[John G Heim]

So, Nick, what are you doing about this problem?



Let me tell you, if you need some volunteer opportunities, I can find
them for you. I happen to be the president of the International
Association Of Visually Impaired Technologists and we can use volunteers
at all skill levels.

Post by Nick Giannak III
Oh Karen, if only the wider world had your common sense.
I have lurked on this list for many years, back when I used to have fun with Speakup and linux and an Accent SA. The shine came off that system for me years ago, but it wouldn’t be the last time I worked with a volunteer project.
The prevailing thought process amongst this kind of project is the following. “I designed this project for my own personal use, I decide what comes next.” The guy won’t implement anything that is different to his own workflow, even if a dominant number of his users asks for it. Never mind what happens if he finds himself in a bind and needs help, he doesn’t think this way and continues the slow alienation of his user base. And we except it, after all, it’s volunteer software, right?

Post by Karen Lewellen
Why yes, in part my question was rhetorical.
However, I do not understand the volunteer factor at all.
Perhaps I am an innocent, but the individuals spending time on this software freely by choice are doing this so that someone other than themselves can make use of their work.
Is not this the case?
Otherwise, you could perfectly well play with the programs at your house for your own use, and subject to only your own ideas of functionality.
If my guess is correct, the individuals willingly volunteering intend for someone to use the program, then does it not logically follow that those others, using their own computers, unique in how they learn...because all humans are different, will share the results of their efforts?
certainly if your work is quality, many will praise your abilities by supporting your work by using it...and as they bring in their individual ways of using the software, they will ask for more.
all of this, at least to me as an outsider seems sort of apparent if you are going to create software, and share it with anyone.
My point is that I do not understand why the volunteer factor carries any weight...the nature of volunteering is freedom of choice...is not that true? If you do not wish your work subjected to public expecting, and requests for improvement, why share it at all?
Again just curious,

I am going to guess that you didn't really intend to ask me why a developer can't be all things to all people. That, obviously, would be impossible. But going on what I take to be the intent of your question, I'm going to say that we all need to keep in mind that the developers are volunteers. They have a right to decide for themselves what the best use of their time is.
You say, "Imagine a person who really needed braille being told that the developers cannot be all things to all people" as if that is obviously wrong. But it's not. It would depend on how hard it is to include braille support.
An ethical developer does his best to listen to constructive criticism. He does his best not to exclude anyone. But there is a nearly infinite call on his time. I am guessing you haven't gotten into volunteering as a developer, right? There is no limit to the number of requests you'll get. No matter how hard you work, someone will ask for more. In fact, I'd say the better job you do, the more likely it is that you'll be asked for more.

Post by Karen Lewellen
Why not?
The images already exist.
The usb stick booting issue is an even greater reason to keep the cd
option around.
i will give you another example.
I am not a braille user, and if one follows the numbers most
individuals experiencing sight loss are not using braille either.
Less than 8% or so are using braille.
However I would guess this flavor of Linux is designed to work with
braille, even if the majority of its users in theory might not use it,
or given the expense of a display, might not have access to it.
Factor in those individuals who use speech, but not braille, and who not
experience sight loss, but have a print disability..like dyslexia.
Given cd roms are far more common, and the majority of the computing
population who might desire accessibility might find one, how are the
developers serving the majority by not keeping this option available?
Imagine a person who really needed braille being told that the
developers cannot be all things to all people?
Just a theoretical comparison.
You serve more people in theory by keeping the cd images as an option
than not if that makes sense.
Again Just my thoughts,
Karen

Post by John G Heim
Good point. I'd say perhaps that the real problem wouldn't be that
these machines have CD-ROM drives but rather that a lot of older
machines won't boot from a USB stick. My scanner machine is like
that. I have a linux machine with an ISA hardware speech synth and a
SCSI flatbed scanner attached and it won't boot from a thumb drive. I
would hate to give up that machine.

Post by Karen Lewellen

Post by John G Heim
On the other hand, I think it is reasonable for the developers of

talking arch to say that they can't be all things to all people. You
will just have to use another flavor of linux.

Post by Karen Lewellen
Just an aside on the cd media issue.
Perhaps you have not considered that Linux is not simply a north
American effort. additionally even in North America, a person just
starting out with Linux might get their hardware second hand. for
example from any of the many freecycle groups around the globe.
Those machines will still use cds, which is why they are second hand.
You can still purchase blank cd media as well.
So do you really want to prevent a person from trying this > > distribution
if they are starting at the bottom based on the thinking of those who
have used it for a while?
I am simply speaking in general here. If I were making this decision, I
would keep a cd simply because there can still be an audience for > > it.
Just my totally from the sidelines thought.
Karen

Post by John G Heim

Post by Tony Baechler

I'm not going to quote Kyle's very long reply here, but I'll > > > address

1. No, I wasn't complaining. I was simply pointing out

observations.

Post by John G Heim
I apologize if it came across as complaining, but I tried to keep
things as unbiased as possible.

Post by Tony Baechler
2. My live CD is meant as a rescue CD since there currently isn't > > > > a

Debian rescue CD, let alone a talking one. One can install it to a
hard drive if they wish, but that's not the purpose. As I also
mentioned but you failed to address, Debian is eventually going to

get

Post by John G Heim
this fixed and it will talk, so there will be no need for my CD.

Post by Tony Baechler
3. I was not complaining about or requesting CD media. Some > > > > people

have mentioned this and older machines might not have DVD readers.
That's it. Personally, I agree with you that CD media is probably > > > no
longer necessary.
My live CD is at the max of 700 MB now and is still missing > > > packages
I want to add. I'm faced with the choice of freezing development > > > or
growing to DVD media.

Post by Tony Baechler
No, I won't join your IRC channel and no, I won't bother with the

sound card issue. It is a Sound Blaster Audigy and the issue has

been

Post by John G Heim
fixed in Debian, so borrow their ALSA configuration. I did read > > > the
blog before downloading the CD image several months back.

Eventually,

Post by John G Heim
I'll take another look at Arch, but not for a while.

Post by Tony Baechler
Finally, not once did I say Arch is bad or what you're doing is

bad.

Post by John G Heim
I have suggested Talking Arch a few times, but people weren't
interested. For the few people who only want the console for

whatever

Post by John G Heim
reason, Arch is a good alternative and I didn't say otherwise. I
simply pointed out why I personally can't recommend it. I look at
several issues, such as what I previously mentioned. There is no
public bug tracker specific to Talking Arch, there are only two
developers, support email didn't get answered, etc.
That is understandable given the volunteer nature of the project,

but

Post by John G Heim
does unfortunately mean I can't recommend it to the masses. I'm

never

Post by John G Heim
close-minded, so when you feel this issues have been addressed,

please

Post by John G Heim
post here or contact me and I'll take another look.

Post by Tony Baechler
_______________________________________________

Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Post by Tony Baechler

Post by Tony Baechler
_______________________________________________

Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup
--

_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

--
_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

[John G Heim]

But, Karen, you've changed your point. Nobody in this thread said that
there is anything wrong with end users making feature requests. In fact,
I quite clearly said the opposite. A good developer welcomes
constructive criticism.

End users don't have a right to demand features. They should make sure
their criticism is constructive in nature. And end users should
understand that an open source developer can't be all things to all people.

Developers have ethical obligations too, IMO. Being a volunteer doesn't
absolve them from accessibility obligations, for example. But again,
that would be "best effort". If you're putting out a live distro, the
ethical thing to do is to try really, really hard to support braille.
But if you can't, you can't.

Post by Karen Lewellen
Why yes, in part my question was rhetorical.
However, I do not understand the volunteer factor at all.
Perhaps I am an innocent, but the individuals spending time on this
software freely by choice are doing this so that someone other than
themselves can make use of their work.
Is not this the case?
Otherwise, you could perfectly well play with the programs at your house
for your own use, and subject to only your own ideas of functionality.
If my guess is correct, the individuals willingly volunteering intend
for someone to use the program, then does it not logically follow that
those others, using their own computers, unique in how they
learn...because all humans are different, will share the results of
their efforts?
certainly if your work is quality, many will praise your abilities by
supporting your work by using it...and as they bring in their
individual ways of using the software, they will ask for more.
all of this, at least to me as an outsider seems sort of apparent if
you are going to create software, and share it with anyone.
My point is that I do not understand why the volunteer factor carries
any weight...the nature of volunteering is freedom of choice...is not
that true? If you do not wish your work subjected to public
expecting, and requests for improvement, why share it at all?
Again just curious,

Post by John G Heim
I am going to guess that you didn't really intend to ask me why a
developer can't be all things to all people. That, obviously, would be
impossible. But going on what I take to be the intent of your
question, I'm going to say that we all need to keep in mind that the
developers are volunteers. They have a right to decide for themselves
what the best use of their time is.
You say, "Imagine a person who really needed braille being told that
the developers cannot be all things to all people" as if that is
obviously wrong. But it's not. It would depend on how hard it is to
include braille support.
An ethical developer does his best to listen to constructive
criticism. He does his best not to exclude anyone. But there is a
nearly infinite call on his time. I am guessing you haven't gotten
into volunteering as a developer, right? There is no limit to the
number of requests you'll get. No matter how hard you work, someone
will ask for more. In fact, I'd say the better job you do, the more
likely it is that you'll be asked for more.

Post by Karen Lewellen
Why not?
The images already exist.
The usb stick booting issue is an even greater reason to keep the cd
option around.
i will give you another example.
I am not a braille user, and if one follows the numbers most
individuals experiencing sight loss are not using braille either.
Less than 8% or so are using braille.
However I would guess this flavor of Linux is designed to work with
braille, even if the majority of its users in theory might not use it,
or given the expense of a display, might not have access to it.
Factor in those individuals who use speech, but not braille, and who not
experience sight loss, but have a print disability..like dyslexia.
Given cd roms are far more common, and the majority of the computing
population who might desire accessibility might find one, how are the
developers serving the majority by not keeping this option available?
Imagine a person who really needed braille being told that the
developers cannot be all things to all people?
Just a theoretical comparison.
You serve more people in theory by keeping the cd images as an option
than not if that makes sense.
Again Just my thoughts,
Karen

Post by John G Heim
Good point. I'd say perhaps that the real problem wouldn't be that
these machines have CD-ROM drives but rather that a lot of older
machines won't boot from a USB stick. My scanner machine is like
that. I have a linux machine with an ISA hardware speech synth and a
SCSI flatbed scanner attached and it won't boot from a thumb

drive. I

Post by John G Heim
would hate to give up that machine.

Post by Karen Lewellen

Post by John G Heim
On the other hand, I think it is reasonable for the developers of

talking arch to say that they can't be all things to all people. You
will just have to use another flavor of linux.

Post by Karen Lewellen
Just an aside on the cd media issue.
Perhaps you have not considered that Linux is not simply a north
American effort. additionally even in North America, a person

just

Post by John G Heim

Post by Karen Lewellen
starting out with Linux might get their hardware second hand.

for

Post by John G Heim

Post by Karen Lewellen
example from any of the many freecycle groups around the globe.
Those machines will still use cds, which is why they are second

hand.

Post by John G Heim

Post by Karen Lewellen
You can still purchase blank cd media as well.
So do you really want to prevent a person from trying this >

distribution

Post by Karen Lewellen
if they are starting at the bottom based on the thinking of

those who

Post by John G Heim

Post by Karen Lewellen
have used it for a while?
I am simply speaking in general here. If I were making this decision, I
would keep a cd simply because there can still be an audience

for > > it.

Post by John G Heim

Post by Karen Lewellen
Just my totally from the sidelines thought.
Karen

Post by John G Heim

Post by Tony Baechler

Post by Tony Baechler
I'm not going to quote Kyle's very long reply here, but

I'll > > > address

Post by John G Heim

Post by Karen Lewellen

Post by John G Heim

Post by Tony Baechler
1. No, I wasn't complaining. I was simply pointing out

observations.

Post by John G Heim
I apologize if it came across as complaining, but I tried to

keep

Post by John G Heim

Post by Karen Lewellen

Post by John G Heim
things as unbiased as possible.

Post by Tony Baechler
2. My live CD is meant as a rescue CD since there currently

isn't > > > > a

Post by John G Heim

Post by Karen Lewellen

Post by John G Heim
Debian rescue CD, let alone a talking one. One can install

it to a

Post by John G Heim

Post by Karen Lewellen

Post by John G Heim
hard drive if they wish, but that's not the purpose. As I also
mentioned but you failed to address, Debian is eventually

going to

Post by John G Heim

Post by Karen Lewellen
get

Post by John G Heim
this fixed and it will talk, so there will be no need for my CD.

Post by Tony Baechler
3. I was not complaining about or requesting CD media.

Some > > > > people

Post by John G Heim

Post by Karen Lewellen

Post by John G Heim
have mentioned this and older machines might not have DVD

readers.

Post by John G Heim

Post by Karen Lewellen

Post by John G Heim
That's it. Personally, I agree with you that CD media is

probably > > > no

Post by John G Heim

Post by Karen Lewellen

Post by John G Heim
longer necessary.
My live CD is at the max of 700 MB now and is still missing packages
I want to add. I'm faced with the choice of freezing

development > > > or

Post by John G Heim

Post by Karen Lewellen

Post by John G Heim
growing to DVD media.

Post by Tony Baechler
No, I won't join your IRC channel and no, I won't bother

with the

Post by John G Heim

Post by Karen Lewellen

Post by John G Heim
sound card issue. It is a Sound Blaster Audigy and the issue

has

Post by John G Heim

Post by Karen Lewellen
been

Post by John G Heim
fixed in Debian, so borrow their ALSA configuration. I did

read > > > the

Post by John G Heim

Post by Karen Lewellen

Post by John G Heim
blog before downloading the CD image several months back.

Eventually,

Post by John G Heim
I'll take another look at Arch, but not for a while.

Post by Tony Baechler
Finally, not once did I say Arch is bad or what you're

doing is

Post by John G Heim

Post by Karen Lewellen
bad.

Post by John G Heim
I have suggested Talking Arch a few times, but people weren't
interested. For the few people who only want the console for

whatever

Post by John G Heim
reason, Arch is a good alternative and I didn't say

otherwise. I

Post by John G Heim

Post by Karen Lewellen

Post by John G Heim
simply pointed out why I personally can't recommend it. I

look at

Post by John G Heim

Post by Karen Lewellen

Post by John G Heim
several issues, such as what I previously mentioned. There

is no

Post by John G Heim

Post by Karen Lewellen

Post by John G Heim
public bug tracker specific to Talking Arch, there are only two
developers, support email didn't get answered, etc.
That is understandable given the volunteer nature of the

project,

Post by John G Heim

Post by Karen Lewellen
but

Post by John G Heim
does unfortunately mean I can't recommend it to the masses. I'm

never

Post by John G Heim
close-minded, so when you feel this issues have been addressed,

please

Post by John G Heim
post here or contact me and I'll take another look.

Post by Tony Baechler
_______________________________________________

Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Post by Tony Baechler

Post by Tony Baechler

Post by Tony Baechler
_______________________________________________

Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup
--

_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

--
_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

[Kyle]

I had a machine that came into my possession for a short time with a
broken CD-ROM drive, and it also wouldn't boot from USB. The BIOS date
on this machine said October 15, 1999. I had good success booting from
a floppy image that I found on
http://plop.at/
which also has CD boot images. This image somehow allows booting from
USB by inserting it into whatever media will boot and pressing the
letter u. My laptop works this way, as I can boot it from a DVD, but
not from USB. So I put the CD boot image into the CD-ROM crive, boot it
up and press the letter u about 3 seconds after the drive starts
spinning. This causes the USD drive with whatever distro I like to boot
normally. This is really a godsend, as the DVD drive on most machines
is extremely slow, and I currently don't have many writable DVD's or
CD's. I couldn't get the latest version to work on this rather old
laptop, probably due to a lack of RAM, but I have been able to load
Fedora 20 and I believe even 21 using this method. Hope this helps.
Sent from the library

[Glenn]

Kyle,
This stuff on this site is a real gem!
Thanks for the link.
Glenn
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kyle" <***@gmail.com>
To: <***@linux-speakup.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 12:13 PM
Subject: Re: Why I can't recommend Arch or Gentoo


I had a machine that came into my possession for a short time with a
broken CD-ROM drive, and it also wouldn't boot from USB. The BIOS date
on this machine said October 15, 1999. I had good success booting from
a floppy image that I found on
http://plop.at/
which also has CD boot images. This image somehow allows booting from
USB by inserting it into whatever media will boot and pressing the
letter u. My laptop works this way, as I can boot it from a DVD, but
not from USB. So I put the CD boot image into the CD-ROM crive, boot it
up and press the letter u about 3 seconds after the drive starts
spinning. This causes the USD drive with whatever distro I like to boot
normally. This is really a godsend, as the DVD drive on most machines
is extremely slow, and I currently don't have many writable DVD's or
CD's. I couldn't get the latest version to work on this rather old
laptop, probably due to a lack of RAM, but I have been able to load
Fedora 20 and I believe even 21 using this method. Hope this helps.
Sent from the library
_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
***@linux-speakup.org
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

[Chris Brannon]

Post by Tony Baechler
but if the Linux community wants the blind Windows community to take
Linux seriously, there needs to be a talking GUI which just works.
Unless someone really likes DOS, they aren't going to like the command
line enough to give it a fair chance.

Maybe I'll answer some of your other criticisms in a subsequent reply.
All in all, this is a great post.

I make no bones about being an elitist snob, so take what I say with
that in mind. Neither Arch nor Gentoo is really aimed at winning
converts from Windows, so this is an unfair criticism. It's like
criticizing gourmet cooking because it doesn't appeal to the palates of
people raised on McDonalds hamburgers.
Yes, there are distros that try to be more like Windows, but Linux still
has a very low market share, and I don't see that changing on the
desktop.

On the other hand, if you really want a Linux with a usable talking GUI,
look at Android. I love it. Yes, it has lots of rough edges, but I'm
definitely a fan. And it is seeing mass adoption.
The fact is, over time, the desktop will become less and less relevant.
Here's a great talk from Rob Landley at the Embedded Linux Conference in
2013 where he discusses this in a bit more depth:
http://the-brannons.com/elc2013-landley-toybox.ogg
Maybe someday in the not too distant future, the thing you know as
desktop Linux will pretty much be subsumed by Android.

All the best,
-- Chris

[Tony Baechler]

Post by Chris Brannon
I make no bones about being an elitist snob, so take what I say with
that in mind. Neither Arch nor Gentoo is really aimed at winning
converts from Windows, so this is an unfair criticism. It's like
criticizing gourmet cooking because it doesn't appeal to the palates of
people raised on McDonalds hamburgers.
Yes, there are distros that try to be more like Windows, but Linux still
has a very low market share, and I don't see that changing on the
desktop.

Yes, I agree about the low market share. That, indirectly, is kind of the
point of my post. I can't very well recommend something for the masses
that's difficult to use for those who only want a GUI. Even though it might
not seem like it, my goal here is to increse the popularity of Linux.
Whenever possible, I reply to list posts suggesting Linux and/or open source
alternatives. What I said about them not having a talking GUI was not meant
as a criticism. The great thing about Linux is there are hundreds of
distros. There is a good chance that someone already invented one to
scratch your particular itch. The bad thing is there are hundreds of
distros and it's very difficult for someone potentially interested to know
which one to choose. As I said in another post, I do suggest Arch to people
who like the idea of doing everything yourself and building from source, but
in my experience, this is a very, very small percentage of an already very
small market.

Thanks for the link to the talk. I have downloaded it and intend to listen
to it. I've been wanting to play with Android, but I don't have a cell
phone or tablet and probably can't afford to buy one. I've read about
virtual machines with Android installed, but I don't know of any which come
up talking.

Post by Chris Brannon
On the other hand, if you really want a Linux with a usable talking GUI,
look at Android. I love it. Yes, it has lots of rough edges, but I'm
definitely a fan. And it is seeing mass adoption.
The fact is, over time, the desktop will become less and less relevant.
Here's a great talk from Rob Landley at the Embedded Linux Conference in
http://the-brannons.com/elc2013-landley-toybox.ogg
Maybe someday in the not too distant future, the thing you know as
desktop Linux will pretty much be subsumed by Android.
All the best,
-- Chris
_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

[Kyle]

I have to disagree with the idea of Android replacing desktop Linux.
Mobile operating systems are fundamentally different from desktop
operating systems still, and I don't see that changing any time soon.
On the other hand, the ARM processors that power most mobile devices
are becoming more and more powerful at lower costs, and are now quite
capable of running full desktop Linux, including the full version of
LibreOffice, which can both read and write documents, unlike the
Android version, which as far as I know is only a viewer. Desktop Linux
also has the advantage of being more open than most manufacturer
specific versions of Android, including root access for those who want
it, and even the ability to change out the desktop interface if you
want to do such things. Android is a decent mobile OS for phones, and
is even OK on larger things like tablets, but if I could run a desktop
Linux on either a phone or a tablet, I would feel much more comfortable
in that environment, especially since processing power, RAM and other
system resources are not the obstacles they used to be. I would say
that rather than mobile OS's taking over the market, the trend could
move toward the desktop taking over the mobile space. The hardware is
certainly capable of it, and I would love to see the software becoming
available on more such devices.
Sent from my custom ROM

[Chris Brannon]

Post by Kyle
On the other hand, the ARM processors that power most mobile devices
are becoming more and more powerful at lower costs, and are now quite
capable of running full desktop Linux, including the full version of
LibreOffice, which can both read and write documents, unlike the
Android version, which as far as I know is only a viewer.

Back in 1997, I had a Windows machine with 32 megabytes of RAM and a 133
MHz Pentium processor, and it could run a word processor capable of both
reading and writing documents quite adequately. Granted, I soon learned
LaTeX and forsook word processors altogether, but I do understand why
people like them. So nowadays, I have a phone with at least an order of
magnitude more memory and processing power. If it cannot run a word
processor capable of both reading and writing documents, then this is
the fault of software makers. Is Libreoffice really that much more
capable than MS Word was in 1997? Does the profligate waste of
computing resources really make any of us that much more creative or
productive? As an aside, did you know that the author of the Game of
Thrones novels still uses Word Star on MS DOS?

Post by Kyle
also has the advantage of being more open than most manufacturer
specific versions of Android, including root access for those who want
it, and even the ability to change out the desktop interface if you
want to do such things.

Yes, point taken. On the other hand, there are custom ROMs, and out of
the currently existing mobile offerings, Android is the most appropriate
for me right now.

Post by Kyle
that rather than mobile OS's taking over the market, the trend could
move toward the desktop taking over the mobile space. The hardware is
certainly capable of it, and I would love to see the software becoming
available on more such devices.

Well, I wouldn't mind seeing the best parts of the desktop experience
replicated on mobile. What I don't want is a repeat of the wastefulness
we've seen on PCs during the last couple of decades. Unfortunately, I'm
sure I'll get both.

-- Chris

[Gregory Nowak]

Post by Kyle
I have to disagree with the idea of Android replacing desktop Linux.
Mobile operating systems are fundamentally different from desktop
operating systems still, and I don't see that changing any time soon.

Given the nature of ios (which I'll admit I never used), and windows
8/10 (I have played with 10) apple and microsoft don't seem to think
so, which is unfortunate.

Post by Kyle
Android is a decent mobile OS for phones, and
is even OK on larger things like tablets, but if I could run a desktop
Linux on either a phone or a tablet, I would feel much more comfortable
in that environment, especially since processing power, RAM and other
system resources are not the obstacles they used to be.

There is ubuntu touch <http://www.ubuntu.com/phone>. I haven't used it
though, and don't know if orca has touch screen support yet.

Greg

[Kyle]

Unfortunately, I don't believe that Orca has full touch screen support
as of this moment. Specifically, I don't think touch screens are fully
supported in at-spi, which is the part of the system that actually
handles such things. Touch screen support in at-spi and Orca would
currently be limited to some sort of mouse pointer emulation that may
work similar to the way Android's explore by touch system works, but
this would be using the "speak object under mouse" functionality of
Orca, which may present more problems on touch screens than it solves.
I'm still not comfortable attempting to type on touch screens anyway,
which is why I still purchase phones with built-in keyboards. If I'm
gonna purchase a second device just for typing, then I'd rather have a
laptop, and I'm currently working on building an open design around
some of the new ARM boards, which should combine the best of the
desktop in a much more portable package with better battery life than
most of today's laptops, and would offer better input flexibility than
most of today's tablets.
Sent from my cello

[Steve Matzura]

Post by Tony Baechler
All,
I've been following the Talking Arch discussion with great interest. I'm
sure what I am about to say will be rather unpopular, but I can only go by
my own experiences and what I've read. If these issues can be addressed, I
think both distributions have great potential, but as things stand now, I
can't recommend them. I'll start with Arch first.
I had no problem downloading Arch and burning it to a CD. It fit on a CD
without difficulty, but apparently the current release doesn't. That is
most unfortunate as not everyone wants to burn a DVD for a command line
based distro. You expect it with Fedora and Ubuntu, but even Debian has
several small CD images for installation. Hopefully something can be done
to get it back to CD sized media.
Unlike what Kyle says, I couldn't get speech upon boot. I pressed Enter at
least six times, plus other random characters. I've also encountered the
problem where speech starts after a few keys, but not in this case. I know
where the problem lies. It's because of my sound card, specifically the
emu10k1 driver. It has a weird problem with no volume by default. It isn't
muted, but the analog switch is toggled. This was fixed a long time ago in
Debian and Ubuntu, but obviously didn't make it to Arch. I reported this to
the support address and didn't get a reply for about two weeks. There was
no interest in fixing the problem, even when I offered to help.
Similarly, due to how brltty is configured by default, it locked up my
DECtalk Express. I had to reset it by turning it off and on before it would
talk again. Again, in the same email, I reported this to support and there
was no interest in fixing it. In looking at the brltty.conf installed with
Debian testing, it looks like literally just commenting out a line would fix
this. I understand that some people still use serial Braille displays, but
USB autodetection is the default and serial devices aren't very common
nowadays, so the serial detection can probably be safely disabled. People
can still start brltty by hand or edit brltty.conf directly.
Finally, due to its unofficial nature, it is not officially supported by the
Arch developers, so there isn't a way to file bugs in a public forum, such
... It has the same problem as Vinux (which I also don't
recommend) in that there are only two active developers working on it. If
one of them gets sick or for some reason can't keep up with the latest
releases, so much for Talking whatever. I am strongly against specialized
distributions for the blind exactly for this reason. Whatever happened to
Oralux? Both Debian and Ubuntu do have accessibility teams and the
developers take accessibility issues seriously.

That being the case, I don't understand why you don't like Vinux,
which is a modified Ubuntu distro. Is there a way to use Ubuntu (or
Debian) and get Speakup or some other speech working so it can be
installed or used accessibly without having to resort to a special
distro?

Post by Tony Baechler
much as I don't like Vinux, it does come up with a desktop which you can
try. Ubuntu is the best in this regard in my opinion as it plays a sound so
you know it actually works.

Then what's the best alternative?

Post by Tony Baechler
if the Linux community wants the blind Windows community to take Linux
seriously, there needs to be a talking GUI which just works. Unless someone
really likes DOS, they aren't going to like the command line enough to give
it a fair chance. This applies to the sighted community as well.

Funny you should say that, because I'd prefer a command-line setup
over a GUI any day in the week. Why? Because it's what I'm used to,
way back to SCO Xenix and AT&T System V. Give me a talking CLI and I
can rule my world.

Post by Tony Baechler
What do I recommend? For people who do like the command line and have a
strong DOS background, I recommend Debian. It has a talking, menu-driven
installer. The command line is there if you want it, but it isn't required.

Great. How do I start it talking after boot?

Post by Tony Baechler
For most people, I recommend Ubuntu MATE.

Same question applies.

[Jude DaShiell]

Slackware also offers either small cd's or a dvd.

Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2015 07:23:10
Reply-To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.
Subject: Re: Why I can't recommend Arch or Gentoo

Post by Tony Baechler
All,
I've been following the Talking Arch discussion with great interest. I'm
sure what I am about to say will be rather unpopular, but I can only go by
my own experiences and what I've read. If these issues can be addressed, I
think both distributions have great potential, but as things stand now, I
can't recommend them. I'll start with Arch first.
I had no problem downloading Arch and burning it to a CD. It fit on a CD
without difficulty, but apparently the current release doesn't. That is
most unfortunate as not everyone wants to burn a DVD for a command line
based distro. You expect it with Fedora and Ubuntu, but even Debian has
several small CD images for installation. Hopefully something can be done
to get it back to CD sized media.
Unlike what Kyle says, I couldn't get speech upon boot. I pressed Enter at
least six times, plus other random characters. I've also encountered the
problem where speech starts after a few keys, but not in this case. I know
where the problem lies. It's because of my sound card, specifically the
emu10k1 driver. It has a weird problem with no volume by default. It isn't
muted, but the analog switch is toggled. This was fixed a long time ago in
Debian and Ubuntu, but obviously didn't make it to Arch. I reported this to
the support address and didn't get a reply for about two weeks. There was
no interest in fixing the problem, even when I offered to help.
Similarly, due to how brltty is configured by default, it locked up my
DECtalk Express. I had to reset it by turning it off and on before it would
talk again. Again, in the same email, I reported this to support and there
was no interest in fixing it. In looking at the brltty.conf installed with
Debian testing, it looks like literally just commenting out a line would fix
this. I understand that some people still use serial Braille displays, but
USB autodetection is the default and serial devices aren't very common
nowadays, so the serial detection can probably be safely disabled. People
can still start brltty by hand or edit brltty.conf directly.
Finally, due to its unofficial nature, it is not officially supported by the
Arch developers, so there isn't a way to file bugs in a public forum, such
... It has the same problem as Vinux (which I also don't
recommend) in that there are only two active developers working on it. If
one of them gets sick or for some reason can't keep up with the latest
releases, so much for Talking whatever. I am strongly against specialized
distributions for the blind exactly for this reason. Whatever happened to
Oralux? Both Debian and Ubuntu do have accessibility teams and the
developers take accessibility issues seriously.

That being the case, I don't understand why you don't like Vinux,
which is a modified Ubuntu distro. Is there a way to use Ubuntu (or
Debian) and get Speakup or some other speech working so it can be
installed or used accessibly without having to resort to a special
distro?

Post by Tony Baechler
much as I don't like Vinux, it does come up with a desktop which you can
try. Ubuntu is the best in this regard in my opinion as it plays a sound so
you know it actually works.

Then what's the best alternative?

Post by Tony Baechler
if the Linux community wants the blind Windows community to take Linux
seriously, there needs to be a talking GUI which just works. Unless someone
really likes DOS, they aren't going to like the command line enough to give
it a fair chance. This applies to the sighted community as well.

Funny you should say that, because I'd prefer a command-line setup
over a GUI any day in the week. Why? Because it's what I'm used to,
way back to SCO Xenix and AT&T System V. Give me a talking CLI and I
can rule my world.

Post by Tony Baechler
What do I recommend? For people who do like the command line and have a
strong DOS background, I recommend Debian. It has a talking, menu-driven
installer. The command line is there if you want it, but it isn't required.

Great. How do I start it talking after boot?

Post by Tony Baechler
For most people, I recommend Ubuntu MATE.

Same question applies.
_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

--

[Gregory Nowak]

Post by Steve Matzura
Is there a way to use Ubuntu (or
Debian) and get Speakup or some other speech working so it can be
installed or used accessibly without having to resort to a special
distro?

I can't speak to ubuntu, but as far as debian, the answer is a
resounding yes! From what I remember, software speech during the
install was an option since debian wheezy, which came out back in
2013 I think. I don't recall for sure, but speakup with
hardware speech was an option in the official debian install media as
far as squeeze, which came out sometime in 2011. Someone will correct
me here if I'm wrong.

Post by Steve Matzura

Post by Tony Baechler
What do I recommend? For people who do like the command line and have a
strong DOS background, I recommend Debian. It has a talking, menu-driven
installer. The command line is there if you want it, but it isn't required.

Great. How do I start it talking after boot?

Insert the CD in the drive. The cd in question has to be the netinst iso,
or the first cd/dvd/bd from the official install set. It cannot be the small
business cd image. Once you put the cd in, give it a few seconds to spin up.
I don't remember if you get a beep or not. Then, type the letter s,
and press enter. After a few more seconds, you should here espeak say
"select the language for the installation." This is addressed in the install
guides for both x86, and amd64, which you would have known if you had done some
light research, and read either one.

Greg

[Tony Baechler]

Post by Steve Matzura
Great. How do I start it talking after boot?

Post by Tony Baechler
For most people, I recommend Ubuntu MATE.

Same question applies.

Download and burn the DVD from here:

http://www.ubuntu-mate.org/vivid/

Boot the DVD. Wait about a minute. You're supposed to hear a sound, but I
didn't hear it here. Press Super-Alt-S to start the screen reader. The
Super key is also known as the Windows key. You should hear speech. If you
don't, try again. I noticed it took more than once here sometimes. If you
don't like a GUI, there isn't much point in trying Ubuntu since it's
primarily for desktops. Assuming your sound card is detected, you should be
given an option to try Ubuntu or install. You want to try Ubuntu, even if
you decide to install it. Note that you'll have very low volume, so if you
can't hear it, don't assume it didn't work. I had to really strain to hear,
but speech did start. I was able to do the installation by myself without
sighted help.

--------------------
Tony Baechler, founder, Baechler Access Technology Services
Putting accessibility at the forefront of technology
mailto:***@batsupport.com
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]

[Glenn]

Tony,
I did not get any sound, but I was able to start speech.
How do I enable a startup sound?
I looked in the settings under sounds and was not able to select separate
sound events, only general sound schemes, of which I only found two.
I was expecting something similar to windows where you pick events and
assign sounds to them.
And if I want to place in my own sounds, what is the path to the sounds
folder?
Thanks
Glenn
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tony Baechler" <***@baechler.net>
To: "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux."
<***@linux-speakup.org>
Sent: Saturday, October 03, 2015 3:49 AM
Subject: Re: Why I can't recommend Arch or Gentoo

Post by Steve Matzura
Great. How do I start it talking after boot?

Post by Tony Baechler
For most people, I recommend Ubuntu MATE.

Same question applies.

Download and burn the DVD from here:

http://www.ubuntu-mate.org/vivid/

Boot the DVD. Wait about a minute. You're supposed to hear a sound, but I
didn't hear it here. Press Super-Alt-S to start the screen reader. The
Super key is also known as the Windows key. You should hear speech. If you
don't, try again. I noticed it took more than once here sometimes. If you
don't like a GUI, there isn't much point in trying Ubuntu since it's
primarily for desktops. Assuming your sound card is detected, you should be
given an option to try Ubuntu or install. You want to try Ubuntu, even if
you decide to install it. Note that you'll have very low volume, so if you
can't hear it, don't assume it didn't work. I had to really strain to hear,
but speech did start. I was able to do the installation by myself without
sighted help.

--------------------
Tony Baechler, founder, Baechler Access Technology Services
Putting accessibility at the forefront of technology
mailto:***@batsupport.com
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
***@linux-speakup.org
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

[Tony Baechler]

The Orca list is probably a better place to ask these kinds of questions,
but I'll do what I can to help. See replies inline below.

Post by Glenn
I did not get any sound, but I was able to start speech.

Are you saying that you get no sound at all except speech? Can you play an
audio file? Is this with the Ubuntu MATE live DVD or after installation?
If you go to a streaming station online, do you hear sound?

Post by Glenn
How do I enable a startup sound?

Well, one way would be to play a sound in /etc/rc.local, but specifically in
MATE, I don't know. I don't get a startup sound either, but speech starts
for me when MATE starts.

Post by Glenn
I looked in the settings under sounds and was not able to select separate
sound events, only general sound schemes, of which I only found two.
I was expecting something similar to windows where you pick events and
assign sounds to them.
And if I want to place in my own sounds, what is the path to the sounds
folder?

/usr/share/sounds/

[Steve Matzura]

Thanks, Tony. I'll check this out, and the Debian one also. With at
least three highly-recommended Linux's out there, it's hard to decide
which one to choose and use.

Since I'll be in a GUI after boot, how can I increase volume for
speech without being able to run Alsamix?

Post by Tony Baechler

Post by Steve Matzura
Great. How do I start it talking after boot?

Post by Tony Baechler
For most people, I recommend Ubuntu MATE.

Same question applies.

http://www.ubuntu-mate.org/vivid/
Boot the DVD. Wait about a minute. You're supposed to hear a sound, but I
didn't hear it here. Press Super-Alt-S to start the screen reader. The
Super key is also known as the Windows key. You should hear speech. If you
don't, try again. I noticed it took more than once here sometimes. If you
don't like a GUI, there isn't much point in trying Ubuntu since it's
primarily for desktops. Assuming your sound card is detected, you should be
given an option to try Ubuntu or install. You want to try Ubuntu, even if
you decide to install it. Note that you'll have very low volume, so if you
can't hear it, don't assume it didn't work. I had to really strain to hear,
but speech did start. I was able to do the installation by myself without
sighted help.
--------------------
Tony Baechler, founder, Baechler Access Technology Services
Putting accessibility at the forefront of technology
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup

[Tony Baechler]

Post by Steve Matzura
Thanks, Tony. I'll check this out, and the Debian one also. With at
least three highly-recommended Linux's out there, it's hard to decide
which one to choose and use.

Well, there is no right Linux distro. I personally don't like Arch (thus
the original thread) but you might prefer it. I didn't even get into Fedora
which is also highly recommended. All you can do is try different ones
until you find one you like.

Post by Steve Matzura
Since I'll be in a GUI after boot, how can I increase volume for
speech without being able to run Alsamix?

Yes, you can run alsamixer. Press Alt-F2 and enter your command in the edit
box. I would do something like this:

amixer set Master playback 100

If you want alsamixer which uses Curses, check the box to run in terminal.
If you already have an asound.state from another Linux install which works
for you, you can copy it over the default, but that's slightly more complicated.