On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 09:01:43 -0600 Alan Shutko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Robert Storey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > To be more specific, Xemacs has more beautiful fonts and lets you > > change default font size. > > I don't see why you can't change the default font size in > Emacs... you can change the default font, and with it the size. Is > XEmacs using fontconfig these days? If not, the fonts are coming > from the same place. XEmacs does seem to default to displaying more > things in proportional fonts than Emacs does, though I'm not sure > that's a good thing. OK, you can change it in Emacs too, but not so easily or elegantly. Font handling is something Xemacs is actually good at. I type in Chinese sometimes, and the Chinese fonts look terrible in Emacs, but are quite acceptable in Xemacs. > > But Emacs is also good, and of course has the advantage of working > > on the command line as well as in X. > > Well, so can XEmacs. OK, you've got me there. Now I have a question. Does anyone know why in text mode, M-< (beginning-of-buffer) and M-> (end-of-buffer) don't work? They work fine in text mode in some other distros, but not in Debian or Slackware. In X, they always work in every distro (Debian and Slackware included). regards, Robert -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
