Latest Emacs is on one system not graphical

Latest Emacs is on one system not graphical

[Decebal]

I build Emacs on two different systems. On the first system it works
okay, but on the second one Emacs became terminal based. When
installing the version made on the first system on the second system
Emacs is a graphical version. What is happening here?

Also on the first system the background of Emacs is black and on the
second white. What could be the reason?

Re: Latest Emacs is on one system not graphical

[Pascal J. Bourguignon]

Decebal <CLDWesterhof@gmail.com> writes:

> I build Emacs on two different systems. On the first system it works
> okay, but on the second one Emacs became terminal based. When
> installing the version made on the first system on the second system
> Emacs is a graphical version. What is happening here?

Sometimes, for some strange reason, distributions compile and install
non graphic emacs.

Either you'll find a way to configure your distribution to provide a X
emacs, or just download the sources yourself, and compile them with X
enabled.  It takes less than 5 minutes.


> Also on the first system the background of Emacs is black and on the
> second white. What could be the reason?

There are defaults stored in various places.  One is ~/.Xresources,
another is ~/.emacs ; if you get different settings when launching
emacs with or with -Q, then they could come from site global
initialization files (depends on the distribution).


-- 
__Pascal Bourguignon__

Re: Latest Emacs is on one system not graphical

[Decebal]

On 8 mei, 22:40, p...@informatimago.com (Pascal J. Bourguignon) wrote:
> Decebal <CLDWester...@gmail.com> writes:
> > I build Emacs on two different systems. On the first system it works
> > okay, but on the second one Emacs became terminal based. When
> > installing the version made on the first system on the second system
> > Emacs is a graphical version. What is happening here?
>
> Sometimes, for some strange reason, distributions compile and install
> non graphic emacs.
>
> Either you'll find a way to configure your distribution to provide a X
> emacs, or just download the sources yourself, and compile them with X
> enabled.  It takes less than 5 minutes.

That is what I did. (Took more then 5 minutes.) But on the first
system it was compiled as a graphical Emacs and on the other as a non-
graphical. In both cases I did:
    ./configure
    make

On the first system 'src/emacs -q' worked allright, on the second
system it did not.


> > Also on the first system the background of Emacs is black and on the
> > second white. What could be the reason?
>
> There are defaults stored in various places.  One is ~/.Xresources,

Is not there.


> another is ~/.emacs ; if you get different settings when launching
> emacs with or with -Q, then they could come from site global
> initialization files (depends on the distribution).

They are the same and with -q the difference in colors is the same.
There is another difference. On system 1 there is a logo in the info
buffer, which is not the case on system 2. Until now I did not find
differences in the global initialization files.

Re: Latest Emacs is on one system not graphical

[Pascal J. Bourguignon]

Decebal <CLDWesterhof@gmail.com> writes:

> On 8 mei, 22:40, p...@informatimago.com (Pascal J. Bourguignon) wrote:
>> Decebal <CLDWester...@gmail.com> writes:
>> > I build Emacs on two different systems. On the first system it works
>> > okay, but on the second one Emacs became terminal based. When
>> > installing the version made on the first system on the second system
>> > Emacs is a graphical version. What is happening here?
>>
>> Sometimes, for some strange reason, distributions compile and install
>> non graphic emacs.
>>
>> Either you'll find a way to configure your distribution to provide a X
>> emacs, or just download the sources yourself, and compile them with X
>> enabled.  It takes less than 5 minutes.
>
> That is what I did. (Took more then 5 minutes.) But on the first
> system it was compiled as a graphical Emacs and on the other as a non-
> graphical. In both cases I did:
>     ./configure
>     make

Then check configure output.  On one system it doesn't find the X
libraries.   Check if they're installed, find where, and add options
to configure, such as:

  --x-includes=DIR    X include files are in DIR
  --x-libraries=DIR   X library files are in DIR

(other options may be needed, try: ./configure --help).



>> There are defaults stored in various places.  One is ~/.Xresources,
>
> Is not there.

Probably a hint that X is not installed. But anyways, I prefer to
configure things in ~/.emacs.  The difference is that emacs takes the
parameters from X before opening the first frame, so it's directly
created with the right parameters.  It processes ~/.emacs later, and
you may see the frame change from the compiled-in defaults to the
parameters you set in ~/.emacs at start-up.  Not important, just an
esthetic thing.

-- 
__Pascal Bourguignon__

Re: Latest Emacs is on one system not graphical

[Decebal]

On 9 mei, 01:43, p...@informatimago.com (Pascal J. Bourguignon) wrote:
> Then check configure output.  On one system it doesn't find the X
> libraries.   Check if they're installed, find where, and add options
> to configure, such as:
>
>   --x-includes=DIR    X include files are in DIR
>   --x-libraries=DIR   X library files are in DIR

On system 2 xorg-x11-devel was not installed. So that explaines the
difference.
By the way: how important is it to compile Emacs on the system it runs
on? It seemed that it was no problem that on system 2 an Emacs was
running that was buikd on system 1. But maybe there are advantages?

The output from configure on system 1:
Configured for `i686-pc-linux-gnu'.

  Where should the build process find the source code?    /download/
emacs/emacs-22.3
  What operating system and machine description files should Emacs
use?
        `s/gnu-linux.h' and `m/intel386.h'
  What compiler should emacs be built with?               gcc -g -O2 -
Wno-pointer-sign
  Should Emacs use the GNU version of malloc?             yes
      (Using Doug Lea's new malloc from the GNU C Library.)
  Should Emacs use a relocating allocator for buffers?    yes
  Should Emacs use mmap(2) for buffer allocation?         no
  What window system should Emacs use?                    x11
  What toolkit should Emacs use?                          LUCID
  Where do we find X Windows header files?                Standard
dirs
  Where do we find X Windows libraries?                   Standard
dirs
  Does Emacs use -lXaw3d?                                 yes
  Does Emacs use -lXpm?                                   yes
  Does Emacs use -ljpeg?                                  yes
  Does Emacs use -ltiff?                                  yes
  Does Emacs use -lungif?                                 no
  Does Emacs use -lpng?                                   yes
  Does Emacs use X toolkit scroll bars?                   yes

Are the two no's important?

On system 2 is from the last seven only -lXpm true. So I expect that I
have to install some other packages there.