Blind vs. mainstream distros

Linux for blind general discussion blinux-list at
Mon May 1 16:54:59 UTC 2017

Hello, this is Samuel,

Kyle, on lun. 24 avril 2017 07:35:02 -0400, wrote:
> The main problem is that [Arch] already have a brltty package, but
> the brltty-minimal package is needed in order to make it work without
> pulling in lots of unneeded dependencies. This will always need to be
> in a separate repository unfortunately.

Chris, on lun. 24 avril 2017 07:48:29 -0700, answered:
> Yeah, brltty-minimal cuts out a lot of dependencies you don't want or
> need on a console-only CD.

Ok, but couldn't Arch include a brltty-minimal package?  For the people
who want a minimally-installed system, that makes sense.  In Debian we
have separated pieces of brltty into a few binary packages, to avoid the
dependencies.  Doesn't Arch have a way to do something similar?  Doesn't
it make sense generally?

Chris continued:
> I had a long discussion about adding accessibility to boot media
> on the Arch Releng mailing list, way back in 2008.  Basically, the
> conclusion was that it was better for TalkingArch to be a separate
> project, rather than adding some accessibility boot option to the
> official media.

But then users have to find that this separate TalkingArch project
exists, distribution developers are less aware of the need for
accessiblity, and all distributions based on Arch do not benefit from
the talking option.


More information about the Blinux-list mailing list