From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/36978 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Norbert Koch Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Bye bye fontlock Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 17:33:25 +0200 Organization: LF.net GmbH, Stuttgart, Germany Sender: nk@lamia.LF.net Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035172472 11432 80.91.224.250 (21 Oct 2002 03:54:32 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 03:54:32 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: Return-Path: Original-Received: (qmail 21554 invoked from network); 20 Jul 2001 15:33:52 -0000 Original-Received: from lamia.lf.net (212.9.190.31) by gnus.org with SMTP; 20 Jul 2001 15:33:52 -0000 Original-Received: (from nk@localhost) by lamia.LF.net (8.11.3/8.11.3) id f6KFXPR36380; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 17:33:25 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from nk@LF.net) X-Authentication-Warning: lamia.lf.net: nk set sender to nk@LF.net using -f Original-To: ding@gnus.org X-Attribution: viteno X-NCC-RegID: de.lfnet X-URL: http://www.LF.net/ X-Face: iq-"D}ZS'It[NXourO#`D+JoJC>bZPU\xvX4Um\sR}_zUI?R: lt{Y/s1g[=5L/BHY@]NxB(D?&:tCwX@Vp:YJURe}$MDZ1&/v<`C+^AVc"s/&m`Mu#s| In-Reply-To: (Harry Putnam's message of "20 Jul 2001 07:45:13 -0700") User-Agent: Gnus/5.090004 (Oort Gnus v0.04) XEmacs/21.5 (anise) Original-Lines: 22 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:36978 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:36978 Harry Putnam writes: > Karl Kleinpaste writes: > >> Harry Putnam writes: >> > Has anyone else noticed that fontlocking in any of the message buffers >> > has went south. That is, kaput, gone, is no more. >> >> In my Gnus that was CVS-updated about 5 minutes ago, it's working fine >> in XEmacs 21.4, as shown from the result of hitting `F' on your article. >> >> http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~karl/gnus/screenshots/2001_07_20_081902_shot.gif > > Thanks Karl, that points to a local config problem here but... >> >> Perhaps you're up against a GNU Emacs 21 bug? > > Seems unlikely... Heres why: Yes, because I see the same with 21.5 (beta1) "anise" XEmacs Lucid. norbert.