Re: [tlug] fcitx

[Jens Oliver John <lists@example.com>]

On Sat, May 03, 2014 at 04:18:33PM -0400, Scott Robbins wrote:
> So, does anyone use fcitx?  Today, I gave it a stabl on Lubuntu, Mint, and
> Fedora.  Documentation is bad, for example, one is told to run the
> configuration tool in Ubuntu based, at which point, one gets an error that
> you should install a different config tool. The tool itself, at least to
> me, is completely unintuitive.  

I use it on Debian.

> At any rate, does it run on minimal desktops?  Is there any advantage over
> ibus-mozc, which for me, is a), well documented, as I've written about it,
> and b) works with minimal setup.  
> 
> I saw an ArchLinux wiki article as well, but don't feel like putting
> together an Arch VM today. And even that wiki article seems pretty bad. 
> 
> My big question is, will there be, in the relatively near future,
> compelling reasons to switch from ibus, which seems to work quite well for
> my needs?

I am not sure what you mean with 'minimal setup' -- but I use it in conjunction
with a stand-alone window manager, dwm, on a netbook.

As for advantages of fcitx-mozc over ibus-mozc, there are none in terms of the
'mozc' part. Rather, in general fcitx exposes more features than ibus.  Running
custom xmodmap scripts (or any script on layout changes), a configurable
clipboard/selection history, to mention some examples. I also didn't see an ibus
module for Qt5 support in Debian yet, which fcitx has been offering for some
time.

So, as both frameworks are being actively developed and you seem to be content
with ibus-mozc, I don't see any compelling reasons to prefer the one over the
other.

Best regards,
Jens.