[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH] enable libao support in speech-dispatcher for debian squeeze


On Wed, Aug 03, 2011 at 12:38:19PM +1000, Jason White wrote:
> Mario Lang <mlang@debian.org> wrote:
> > Stable updates are usually security fixes only, thats just the way it
> > works.
> > Enabling features that were previously not enabled is usually really out
> > of scope for stable updates.  
> this is both true and desirable: if I were running stable, I wouldn't want any
> updates other than security and other very critical bug fixes.

Does "speechd drops dead after a few minutes of use in a productive
environment" count as critical bug, or not?

>From my experience, when running the Debian/stable version of
speech-dispatcher with a screenreader on the text console, with the alsa
output option enabled (I know, it's not the default, though), it dies
quickly at a part of the code where speech gets interrupted, which
happens frequently when you just type and let the screenreader read the
first few characters of a line to you. It is a (IMHO very serious) bug
in the original alsa output code of speechd. I have to agree with Halim

As a debian derivative, I cannot use the original "stable" package for
this reason, since I need speechd to reliably work together with the
screenreader in system-wide alsa mode (we also need the software mixing
feature, i.e. playing music or a video in parallel to immediately
responding speech output with unnoticeable delays). 

> I think the "constantly usable testing" proposal in Debian will suit people
> who want to keep up with more recent accessibility work, but who don't want to
> run Sid. The current Testing distribution is also an option for them, of
> course, but the cut idea should make this even easier.

Maintaining a derivative, I myself have no problems using my own
modified/patched version of speech-dispatcher, but would think that
"stable" users do expect a genuine Debian stable package version to be,
well, "stable". ;-)


Reply to: