Re: Nice fonts for emacs 22 GTK on Linux ?

[Brian Adkins]

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:

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merged into trunk, the current page is obsolete."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information, or moving it to an archived page?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