Re: Nice fonts for emacs 22 GTK on Linux ?

[Tim X <timx@nospam.dev.null>]

Brian Adkins <lojicdotcom@gmail.com> writes:

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 merged into trunk, the current page is obsolete."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 information, or moving it to an archived page?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