Mario, 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.
Thanks, John On Thu, 20 May 2004, Mario Lang wrote: > Hi. > > 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. http://www.chpi.org 825 East Johnson; Madison, WI 53703
