Re: BRLTTY and a flite module package?
I vote for the first approach. As a deaf-blind user I have no interest in
speech and certainly don't want BRLTTY bloated with a 6MB speech module.
On Thu, 20 May 2004, Mario Lang wrote:
> Version 3.5 of BRLTTY will have a speech driver module for Festival Lite.
> This module links dynamically against the quite large (6MB or so) festival
> lite library. Now, I am pondering how to go about this new module. I basically
> see two approach:
> 1. Create a new binary package (for example, brltty-flite) and only put
> the driver module /lib/brltty/libbrlttysfl.so) (plus policy-required
> files, or course) in it. This package should Depend on the same
> version of BRLTTY as it was compiled from. A user wishing to use
> the Festival Lite driver module would apt-get install brltty-flite,
> and get BRLTTY + the required (large) library for speech synthesis.
> However, the drawback is that the package brltty-flite would only contain
> a very little binary object (7kb or so). Given that we actually
> want to keep the number of binary packages in the archive at a minimum,
> that is quite a drawback.
> 2. Do not split off the festival lite module. This has the drawback
> that every user, no matter if she is interested in speech at all, or wants
> to use Festival Lite as a backend in particular, would need to
> download the quite huge Festival Lite library package to satisfy
> the dependency. Given that I think most BRLTTY users do not really care
> about speech support currently, this seems like quite a drawback. OTOH,
> the small 7kb object file would stay in the main package, and we wouldn't
> bloat the archive with yet another small binary package.
> Any opinions?
John J. Boyer; Executive Director, Chief Software Developer
Computers to Help People, Inc.
825 East Johnson; Madison, WI 53703