Re: Bug#359062: debian-installer: bterm is not (yet) accessible for brltty
Joey Hess, le Wed 29 Mar 2006 19:03:58 -0500, a écrit :
> Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > I'm not blind so my voice might be suspicious, but I find it a lot
> > easier to use the newt frontend than the text frontend: choosing an
> > option in a long newt list is just a matter of pressing arrows, while
> > browsing through the text list is quite tedious.
>
> Could be fixed by displaying one choice per line.
This is already done so, and really, compared to this, newt is more
usable with a braille device.
> > Are there many people that use the text frontend? The fact that it is
> > currently only included on access floppies, ia64/hppa cdroms and netboot
> > images makes me doubt on that.
>
> It's used by enough things (encluding being the only frontend for s390)
> that it will be kept maintained.
Ok, fine! (for speakup)
> > Really, do you have anything _against_ the "brltty peeks bterm's output"
> > solution?
>
> Yes, it:
>
> - Makes it harder for d-i to move away from using bterm in the future.
It shouldn't be hard to patch any replacement for bterm.
> - Excludes anyone using a machine without a frambuffer supported by d-i
> (including some laptops, and many non-i386 archirectures).
No, that's the converse: brltty _does_ already work fine in such case.
This thread is about _not_ having to disable the framebuffer just for
accessibility stuff.
> - Doesn't solve any issues relating to using brltty on the console of
> the installed system, which will definitly *not* be running bterm.
This issue is _already_ resolved.
> - Has failure modes releated to the video hardware in the system, which
> are impossible for a blind user to diagnose.
Mmm, so what? He doesn't care about video anyway... Or else he cares
because someone non-blind is following the installation too, and that
one can hence diagnose.
Regards,
Samuel
Reply to: