On Wednesday 13 September 2006 09:53, Robert Cernansky wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Sep 2006 16:24:11 -0700 Lord Sauron
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > quoth the Lord Sauron:
>
> [...]
>
> > > > What should I do to fix Emacs? I hear it's a very powerful and
>
> [...]
>
> > Much more confused than before. I get why I'd want to use unicode,
> > but the instructions on how to do that were outdated or for a setup
> > other than mine and they threw me off real quickly.
>
> Did you try ran emacs in X also? Is there the same behaviour? In X
> you can pres Shift + Left mouse click to select fonts.
>
> You can also play with locale setting in your system. For example try
> to start emacs with default/none locale:
>
> $ LC_ALL=C emacs
>
> To set emacs to use UTF-8 put this into your ~/.emacs file:
>
> (setq locale-coding-system 'utf-8)
> (set-terminal-coding-system 'utf-8)
> (set-keyboard-coding-system 'utf-8)
> (set-selection-coding-system 'utf-8)
> (set-clipboard-coding-system 'utf-8)
> (prefer-coding-system 'utf-8)
> (modify-coding-system-alist 'file "" 'utf-8)
> (setq process-coding-system-alist '((".*" . utf-8)))
> (setq x-select-request-type '(UTF8_STRING COMPOUND_TEXT TEXT STRING))
>
> But it should not be necessary if you use some UTF-8 locale in your
> system (emacs will use UTF-8 by default then). You can also try to
> change the 'utf-8' string to some other (non utf-8) enconding, for
> example iso-8859-1.
>
> Try to emerge some basic X.Org fonts, for example
> media-fonts/font-misc-misc. Also emerge media-fonts/intlfonts.I tried that, and emerge --pretend promptly told me that xorg 6.9 or something was blocking virtually everything x-related. It was really weird. It's also blocking xemacs (the package I think will fix this mess). This probably means that I have to go find and fix my package masks. The difficulty there is that there's a ton of junk I'm still using (like Eclipse 3.1) which is masked. I think this is going to end up being a battle between me and portage to sort out my package masks. Is there a untampered copy of packages.mask (or whatever it's called) that I can use to compare with mine to try and fix this mess? -- http://lordsauronthegreat.googlepages.com/
pgp35ZssuPswn.pgp
Description: PGP signature
