Re: [PATCH 2/2] gnu: Add espeak.

[Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name>]

On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 03:17:28PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> skribis:
> 
> > * gnu/packages/audio.scm (espeak): New variable.
> 
> If you think eSpeak-ng is not ready yet, or is sufficiently different,
> it’s OK to package eSpeak.

I'm looking into it.

> 
> > +    (native-inputs
> > +     `(("unzip" ,unzip)))
> > +    (inputs
> > +      `(("sonic" ,sonic)
> 
> The “unzip” line is misaligned.

The "unzip" line or the "sonic" line? Most of the patches I see use the
former style.

> 
> > +        ("pulseaudio" ,pulseaudio)
> > +        ("portaudio" ,portaudio)))
> 
> Dunno if it’s useful to have both, maybe someone more knowledgeable like
> Ricardo can answer?

I misinterpreted the configure options. It's not useful to have both. If
PulseAudio is an input, then eSpeak will always use PulseAudio unless
configured not to, in which case PulseAudio should not be an input.

PulseAudio stopped working completely on my Debian system a while ago.
I decided to keep using ALSA and never looked back (or is it forward, in
this case? ;)

So, if we are going to target PulseAudio, can a PulseAudio user test
that this package works? This should make the computer speak "hello
world":
$ espeak "hello world"

> 
> > +    (synopsis "Software speech synthesizer")
> > +    (description "eSpeak is a compact software speech synthesizer for
> > +English and other languages, for Linux and Windows.  eSpeak uses a
>                               ^---------------------^
> Remove.

Done.

> 
> In general, we don’t mention proprietary software, and we don’t mention
> other OSes, free or not, portability etc., because that’s not what
> matters from the viewpoint of an OS provider.
> 
> The rest LGTM!

Again, I'll be grateful if a PulseAudio user will test!

> 
> Thanks,
> Ludo’.