Nice fonts for emacs 22 GTK on Linux ?
Brian Adkins
and I still can't seem to get a decent font working. I first tried the
Ubuntu packages for emacs 22, but when I failed to get a readable
font, I tried building from source as follows:
./configure --with-gtk --enable-font-backend --with-xft --with-
freetype --with-png --with-tiff --with-jpeg
make
sudo make install
The built-in font selection dialog (from Options | Set font) only has
a few fonts to choose from, so I've been trying to set them manually
as follows:
emacs -r -fn "-bitstream-bitstream vera sans mono-medium-r-*-*-*-100-*-
*-*-*-*-*"
But the fonts look all jaggedy :(
I thought emacs 22 made an improvement by providing anti-aliased font
capabilities - is this true? If so, how does one enable it? Some
articles have stated that 22 doesn't provide this capability.
Brian Adkins
Bill O'Connor
I used this branch:
cvs -z3 -d:pserver:anon...@cvs.savannah.gnu.org:/sources/emacs co -r emacs-unicode-2 emacs
Details here:
Tom Rauchenwald
> I've been Googling for hours, and have rebuilt emacs 22 several times,
> and I still can't seem to get a decent font working. I first tried the
> Ubuntu packages for emacs 22, but when I failed to get a readable
> font, I tried building from source as follows:
...
> I thought emacs 22 made an improvement by providing anti-aliased font
> capabilities - is this true? If so, how does one enable it? Some
> articles have stated that 22 doesn't provide this capability.
No, you still need Emacs from CVS.
Have a look at this: http://www.emacswiki.org/cgi-bin/wiki/XftGnuEmacs
> Brian Adkins
Tom
--
Then I drew in a breath, and my renewed will with it, lifted the rod
in my right hand, murmured a phrase in a language I didn't know, and
blew the tires off his fucking truck.
-- Harry Dresden
Jason Rumney
> I used this branch:
>
> cvs -z3 -d:pserver:anon...@cvs.savannah.gnu.org:/sources/emacs co -r emacs-unicode-2 emacs
That branch is now dead. Use the CVS trunk instead (ie leave out the "-
r emacs-unicode-2" above).
If you want to switch an existing copy to the trunk, use "cvs update -
A".
Nick Roberts
>
> cvs -z3 -d:pserver:anon...@cvs.savannah.gnu.org:/sources/emacs co -r emacs-unicode-2 emacs
>
>
>
> http://www.emacswiki.org/cgi-bin/wiki/XftGnuEmacs
If you check that link it points out that emacs-unicode-2 has recently been
merged to the trunk and that
cvs -z3 -d:pserver:anon...@cvs.savannah.gnu.org:/sources/emacs co emacs
should be enough now.
To update from the trunk, instead ofemacs-unicode-2, just do
cvs update -A
as further Unicode development will happen there.
--
Nick http://www.inet.net.nz/~nickrob
Peter Dyballa
Am 06.02.2008 um 23:50 schrieb Bill O'Connor:
> cvs -z3 -d:pserver:anon...@cvs.savannah.gnu.org:/sources/emacs co
> -r emacs-unicode-2 emacs
This version was latest known as GNU Emacs 23.0.60 – the "other" GNU
Emacs, version 23.0.50, has been upgraded on the weekend to version
23.0.60, so there is, hopefully, only one available via CVS.
You have three choices to run with font-backend active (you can also
invoke GNU Emacs with --disable-font-backend), with any (*one*) of
these three X resources:
Emacs.FontBackend: x
Emacs.FontBackend: xft
Emacs.FontBackend: ftx
First one does nothing (for me, maybe more in X11R7.x), second one
does font-aliasing via libXft, third one does this via libfreetype2
and when compiled *without* libXft.
The fonts pop-up menu does not seem to change. It is set somewhere in
ELisp, but it can be extended or substituted by own code. When using
the font-backend you have to make the libfontconfig(2) system (fc-
list, fc-cache) working. This means that you have to put all
directory names with fonts into /etc/fonts/fonts.conf or such (check
with man), and after this you should launch fc-cache, maybe with -v
(erbose), to create the font hash files in the system.
It seems that the common X Logical Font Description format is
accepted as input, either from the command line or from an X
resource. From this some matching font is looked up.
--
Greetings
Pete
When in doubt, use brute force.
– Ken Thompson
Brian Adkins
> >
> >
> > Details here:
> >
> >http://www.emacswiki.org/cgi-bin/wiki/XftGnuEmacs
>
> If you check that link it points out that emacs-unicode-2 has recently been
> merged to the trunk and that
>
>
> should be enough now.
>
> To update from the trunk, instead ofemacs-unicode-2, just do
>
> cvs update -A
>
> as further Unicode development will happen there.
>
> --
> Nick http://www.inet.net.nz/~nickrob
Thanks guys! I don't know how I got the impression that the emacss22
package was all I needed - what a frustrating experience. By the way,
if someone could edit that wiki page to make it more clear, it might
be helpful. As I explained in my blog post:
http://lojic.com/blog/2008/02/07/nice-fonts-for-gnu-emacs-on-ubuntu-linux/
After hours of Googling, I became too hasty, and when I read the
statement:
"Note: Since the emacs-unicode-2 branch which had the xft support is
merged into trunk, the current page is obsolete."
I thought it applied to the entire wiki page even though the correct
solution immediately follows that statement. It was my mistake, but it
may happen to others also. How about simply removing the obsolete
information, or moving it to an archived page?
Also, can this information be put on the main emacs page?:
http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/
I'm not sure making people work so hard to get nice fonts on emacs is
such a good idea :(
One last question. How bleeding edge is 23.0.60.2 ? For my current
research purposes, it's not a problem, but if I do end up switching
and relying on emacs for my day-to-day editing needs, is it fairly
stable?
Thanks,
Brian Adkins
Peter Dyballa
Am 07.02.2008 um 17:21 schrieb Brian Adkins:
> is it fairly stable?
Yes.
--
Greetings
Pete
Let's face it; we don't want a free market economy either.
– James Farley, president, Coca-Cola Export Corp., 1959
Tom Rauchenwald
> Thanks guys! I don't know how I got the impression that the emacss22
> package was all I needed - what a frustrating experience. By the way,
> if someone could edit that wiki page to make it more clear, it might
> be helpful. As I explained in my blog post:
>
> http://lojic.com/blog/2008/02/07/nice-fonts-for-gnu-emacs-on-ubuntu-linux/
As you said, it is a wiki, so edit it to what you think might be
helpful.
Thanks,
Brian Adkins
<sehnsucht.nach.unendlichk...@quantentunnel.de> wrote:
> Brian Adkins <lojicdot...@gmail.com> writes:
> > Thanks guys! I don't know how I got the impression that the emacss22
> > package was all I needed - what a frustrating experience. By the way,
> > if someone could edit that wiki page to make it more clear, it might
> > be helpful. As I explained in my blog post:
>
>
> As you said, it is a wiki, so edit it to what you think might be
> helpful.
I appreciate your trust, but I really don't think I'm qualified to
hack out the obsolete information from that page. I would likely be
unintentionally deleting some good with the bad.
However, I did move the confusing notice a bit lower on the page which
should be helpful.
Joel J. Adamson
> On Feb 7, 12:17 pm, Tom Rauchenwald
> <sehnsucht.nach.unendlichk...@quantentunnel.de> wrote:
>> Brian Adkins <lojicdot...@gmail.com> writes:
>> > Thanks guys! I don't know how I got the impression that the emacss22
>> > package was all I needed - what a frustrating experience. By the way,
>> > if someone could edit that wiki page to make it more clear, it might
>> > be helpful. As I explained in my blog post:
>>
>> >http://lojic.com/blog/2008/02/07/nice-fonts-for-gnu-emacs-on-ubuntu-l...
>>
>> As you said, it is a wiki, so edit it to what you think might be
>> helpful.
>
> I appreciate your trust, but I really don't think I'm qualified to
> hack out the obsolete information from that page. I would likely be
> unintentionally deleting some good with the bad.
That's why they have editors. Hack away.
Joel
--
Joel J. Adamson
Biostatistician
Pediatric Psychopharmacology Research Unit
Massachusetts General Hospital
Boston, MA 02114
(617) 643-1432
(303) 880-3109
Tim X
> On Feb 6, 6:38 pm, Nick Roberts <nick...@snap.net.nz> wrote:
>> > I used this branch:
>> >
>> > cvs -z3 -d:pserver:anonym...@cvs.savannah.gnu.org:/sources/emacs co -r emacs-unicode-2 emacs
>> >
>> >
>> > Details here:
>> >
>> >http://www.emacswiki.org/cgi-bin/wiki/XftGnuEmacs
>>
>> If you check that link it points out that emacs-unicode-2 has recently been
>> merged to the trunk and that
>>
>> cvs -z3 -d:pserver:anonym...@cvs.savannah.gnu.org:/sources/emacs co emacs
>>
>> should be enough now.
>>
>> To update from the trunk, instead ofemacs-unicode-2, just do
>>
>> cvs update -A
>>
>> as further Unicode development will happen there.
>>
>> --
>> Nick http://www.inet.net.nz/~nickrob
>
> Thanks guys! I don't know how I got the impression that the emacss22
> package was all I needed - what a frustrating experience. By the way,
> if someone could edit that wiki page to make it more clear, it might
> be helpful. As I explained in my blog post:
>
Hi Brian. You write a nice blog and obviously have good communication
skills. Given that emacswiki is a eh wiki and given you know where it
could be improved, why not just jump in an do it?
> http://lojic.com/blog/2008/02/07/nice-fonts-for-gnu-emacs-on-ubuntu-linux/
>
> After hours of Googling, I became too hasty, and when I read the
> statement:
>
> "Note: Since the emacs-unicode-2 branch which had the xft support is
> merged into trunk, the current page is obsolete."
>
> I thought it applied to the entire wiki page even though the correct
> solution immediately follows that statement. It was my mistake, but it
> may happen to others also. How about simply removing the obsolete
> information, or moving it to an archived page?
>
> Also, can this information be put on the main emacs page?:
>
> http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/
>
> I'm not sure making people work so hard to get nice fonts on emacs is
> such a good idea :(
>
> One last question. How bleeding edge is 23.0.60.2 ? For my current
> research purposes, it's not a problem, but if I do end up switching
> and relying on emacs for my day-to-day editing needs, is it fairly
> stable?
>
> Thanks,
> Brian Adkins
I've been running CVS emacs for quite some time and update usually every
week or so. Generally, I've found no problems and its very stable - you
may get minor niggles from time to time.
What I tend to do is run two cvs working areas and alternate between
them. If the latest version is less stable than the version I already
had, I can switch back to it.
Tim
--
tcross (at) rapttech dot com dot au
Joel J. Adamson
> Brian Adkins <lojic...@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> One last question. How bleeding edge is 23.0.60.2 ? For my current
>> research purposes, it's not a problem, but if I do end up switching
>> and relying on emacs for my day-to-day editing needs, is it fairly
>> stable?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Brian Adkins
>
> I've been running CVS emacs for quite some time and update usually every
> week or so. Generally, I've found no problems and its very stable - you
> may get minor niggles from time to time.
I've been using CVS Emacs for four or five months now, and the only
bugs that I've found were in Lisp (i.e. not critical) and were usually
fixed by the time I filed a bug report. The emacs developers are very
responsive.
Xavier Maillard
What I tend to do is run two cvs working areas and alternate between
them. If the latest version is less stable than the version I already
had, I can switch back to it.
This is really a good habit ! I'll do this from now. Thank you
for this precious idea.
Xavier
--
http://www.gnu.org
http://www.april.org
http://www.lolica.org