For the gnome3.6 ibus-integration problem Felix Yan mentioned above, the patch to split ibus into ibus and libibus is already tested and can be found here[1].
[1] https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/32071 On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 7:10 PM, Yichao Yu <yyc1...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 7:09 PM, Yichao Yu <yyc1...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 6:47 PM, Allen Li <cyberdup...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Thu, 18 Oct 2012 17:45:51 +0200 >>> Alexander Rødseth <rods...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> If I understand it correctly, we _could_ drop ibus and just use fcitx >>>> instead, but supporting ibus as well is preferrable, since many people >>>> also use ibus. >>> >>> My gripe with fcitx is that it is poorly documented (in English at >>> least), and I wasn't able to get it to work. I'm sure people are using >>> it fine, but I feel that the quality of software is limited by its >>> documentation. No documentation = software sucks, end of story. If we >>> move in this direction, I'd like to see someone familiar with fcitx >>> update the wiki accordingly =). >> >> We have just updated the English wiki of fcitx recently. It still lack >> some detail description of certain engines (e.g. pinyin) but simply >> install the packages and set environment variables according to the >> arch wiki should make it works just fine. Would you mind describing >> your problem (maybe on fc...@googlegroups.com) so that we can help >> with it and probably add it to wiki? >> >> We are also aware of our poor documentation and is trying to improve >> that both on our own wiki[1] and on the user interface. > > missing link > > [1] fcitx-im.org/wiki/Fcitx > > > .... sorry > > >> >> THX for the suggestion. >> >>> >>> Allen Li