November 2014 - docs-qa - Fedora mailing-lists

[Bug 1008195] New: Enlightenment
by Red Hat Bugzilla 18 Jan '15

18 Jan '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1008195 Bug ID: 1008195 Summary: Enlightenment Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: docs-requests Keywords: Tracking Assignee: nobody(a)fedoraproject.org Reporter: me(a)petetravis.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: jreznik(a)redhat.com, metherid(a)gmail.com, nobody(a)fedoraproject.org, sparks(a)redhat.com, stickster(a)gmail.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Depends On: 954132 (Enlightenment-Tracker), 998517 +++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #998517 +++ This is a tracking bug for Change: Enlightenment For more details, see: http://fedoraproject.org//wiki/Changes/Enlightenment Enlightenment 0.17 a new stable release has been released after 12 years or so of development. As many desktops are being landed on Fedora, Integrating Enlightenment in Fedora can not only enlarge the number of available desktops in Fedora, but also improve user experiences and give users another choice of Desktop Environment. --------------------------- Discussion at https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel-announce/2013-July/001210.h… Please assess existing documentation for the impact of this Change. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 3

[Bug 1001362] New: Ruby on Rails 4.0
by Red Hat Bugzilla 18 Jan '15

18 Jan '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1001362 Bug ID: 1001362 Summary: Ruby on Rails 4.0 Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: docs-requests Keywords: Tracking Assignee: nobody(a)fedoraproject.org Reporter: me(a)petetravis.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: jreznik(a)redhat.com, jstribny(a)redhat.com, nobody(a)fedoraproject.org, sparks(a)redhat.com, stickster(a)gmail.com, vondruch(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Depends On: 998578 +++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #998578 +++ This is a tracking bug for Change: Ruby on Rails 4.0 For more details, see: http://fedoraproject.org//wiki/Changes/Ruby_on_Rails_4.0 Ruby on Rails 4.0 is the latest version of well know web framework written in Ruby. Discussion at https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel-announce/2013-July/001189.h… Please assess existing documentation for the impact of this Change. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 2

[Bug 1008185] New: ACPICA Tools Update
by Red Hat Bugzilla 18 Jan '15

18 Jan '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1008185 Bug ID: 1008185 Summary: ACPICA Tools Update Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: release-notes Keywords: Tracking Assignee: relnotes(a)fedoraproject.org Reporter: me(a)petetravis.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: ahs3(a)redhat.com, jreznik(a)redhat.com, okrh(a)johnfreed.com, relnotes(a)fedoraproject.org, wb8rcr(a)arrl.net, zach(a)oglesby.co Depends On: 998504 +++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #998504 +++ This is a tracking bug for Change: ACPICA Tools Update For more details, see: http://fedoraproject.org//wiki/Changes/AcpicaTools For developers working with the ACPI subsystem, there are tools available from the reference implementation at http://www.acpica.org. These tools have been restructured over time and the current Fedora packages as a result contain either outdated versions or do not make available a complete set of tools. We propose an acpica-tools package that replaces both the existing iasl package and the the existing pmtools package in order to make all current tools available, and make it more straightforward in the future to keep them up-to-date. --- Additional comment from Al Stone on 2013-08-28 18:08:23 EDT --- Package has been uploaded into git and builds done for all architectures for f20. --- Additional comment from John Freed on 2013-09-09 04:02:26 EDT --- acpica-tools obsoletes pmtools, but it appears it should also obsolete iasl: Transaction check error: file /usr/bin/iasl from install of acpica-tools-20130823-2.fc19.x86_64 conflicts with file from package iasl-20120913-7.fc19.x86_64 file /usr/share/man/man1/iasl.1.gz from install of acpica-tools-20130823-2.fc19.x86_64 conflicts with file from package iasl-20120913-7.fc19.x86_64 Erasing iasl and installing acpica-tools works. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 6

[Bug 1008186] New: ACPICA Tools Update
by Red Hat Bugzilla 18 Jan '15

18 Jan '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1008186 Bug ID: 1008186 Summary: ACPICA Tools Update Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: docs-requests Keywords: Tracking Assignee: nobody(a)fedoraproject.org Reporter: me(a)petetravis.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: ahs3(a)redhat.com, jreznik(a)redhat.com, nobody(a)fedoraproject.org, okrh(a)johnfreed.com, sparks(a)redhat.com, stickster(a)gmail.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Depends On: 998504 Blocks: 1008185 +++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #998504 +++ This is a tracking bug for Change: ACPICA Tools Update For more details, see: http://fedoraproject.org//wiki/Changes/AcpicaTools For developers working with the ACPI subsystem, there are tools available from the reference implementation at http://www.acpica.org. These tools have been restructured over time and the current Fedora packages as a result contain either outdated versions or do not make available a complete set of tools. We propose an acpica-tools package that replaces both the existing iasl package and the the existing pmtools package in order to make all current tools available, and make it more straightforward in the future to keep them up-to-date. --- Additional comment from Al Stone on 2013-08-28 18:08:23 EDT --- Package has been uploaded into git and builds done for all architectures for f20. --- Additional comment from John Freed on 2013-09-09 04:02:26 EDT --- acpica-tools obsoletes pmtools, but it appears it should also obsolete iasl: Transaction check error: file /usr/bin/iasl from install of acpica-tools-20130823-2.fc19.x86_64 conflicts with file from package iasl-20120913-7.fc19.x86_64 file /usr/share/man/man1/iasl.1.gz from install of acpica-tools-20130823-2.fc19.x86_64 conflicts with file from package iasl-20120913-7.fc19.x86_64 Erasing iasl and installing acpica-tools works. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 3

[Bug 1001339] New: Migrate to Bluez 5
by Red Hat Bugzilla 18 Jan '15

18 Jan '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1001339 Bug ID: 1001339 Summary: Migrate to Bluez 5 Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: docs-requests Keywords: Tracking Assignee: nobody(a)fedoraproject.org Reporter: me(a)petetravis.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: bnocera(a)redhat.com, jreznik(a)redhat.com, kalevlember(a)gmail.com, nobody(a)fedoraproject.org, sparks(a)redhat.com, stickster(a)gmail.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Depends On: 998563 +++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #998563 +++ This is a tracking bug for Change: Migrate to Bluez 5 For more details, see: http://fedoraproject.org//wiki/Changes/Bluez5 BlueZ is the Linux Bluetooth stack for managing wireless Bluetooth devices. In Fedora 20, we are going to switch from BlueZ version 4 to version 5. Discussion at https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel-announce/2013-August/001227… Please assess existing documentation for the impact of this Change. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 2

[Bug 1001377] New: Perl 5.18
by Red Hat Bugzilla 18 Jan '15

18 Jan '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1001377 Bug ID: 1001377 Summary: Perl 5.18 Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: docs-requests Keywords: Tracking Assignee: nobody(a)fedoraproject.org Reporter: me(a)petetravis.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: jplesnik(a)redhat.com, jreznik(a)redhat.com, nobody(a)fedoraproject.org, sparks(a)redhat.com, stickster(a)gmail.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Depends On: 998584 +++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #998584 +++ This is a tracking bug for Change: Perl 5.18 For more details, see: http://fedoraproject.org//wiki/Changes/perl5.18 A new perl 5.18 version brings a lot of changes done over a year of development. See 5.18.0 perldelta for more details. --- Additional comment from Jitka Plesnikova on 2013-08-23 04:40:10 EDT --- Perl has been updated and the most of packages was rebuilt. All packages, which was not built, are listed on the feature page. --- Additional comment from Jaroslav Reznik on 2013-08-26 10:25:18 EDT --- (In reply to Jitka Plesnikova from comment #1) > Perl has been updated and the most of packages was rebuilt. > All packages, which was not built, are listed on the feature page. Thank you, I'm changing bug state to MODIFIED now to reflect current Change state. Discussion at https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel-announce/2013-June/001158.h… Please assess existing documentation for the impact of this Change. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 2

[Bug 1008231] New: SSSD CIFS plugin
by Red Hat Bugzilla 18 Jan '15

18 Jan '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1008231 Bug ID: 1008231 Summary: SSSD CIFS plugin Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: docs-requests Keywords: Tracking Assignee: nobody(a)fedoraproject.org Reporter: me(a)petetravis.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: jhrozek(a)redhat.com, jreznik(a)redhat.com, nobody(a)fedoraproject.org, sbose(a)redhat.com, sparks(a)redhat.com, stickster(a)gmail.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Depends On: 998544 +++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #998544 +++ This is a tracking bug for Change: SSSD CIFS plugin For more details, see: http://fedoraproject.org//wiki/Changes/SSSD_CIFS_plugin During the F20 development cycle, the SSSD will provide an ID-mapping plugin for cifs-utils so that Windows SIDs can be mapped onto POSIX IDs and/or names without requiring Winbind and using the same code as the SSSD uses for identity information. --- Additional comment from Sumit Bose on 2013-08-28 11:40:40 EDT --- The public interfaces for SID related queries are available and testable. The plugin for the cifs-utils is planned for the next SSSD release which is aligned with the Fedora 20 beta schedule. ---------------------- Discussion at https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2013-July/185376.html Please assess existing documentation for the impact of this Change. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 2

[Bug 1008200] New: GNOME 3.10
by Red Hat Bugzilla 18 Jan '15

18 Jan '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1008200 Bug ID: 1008200 Summary: GNOME 3.10 Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: docs-requests Keywords: Tracking Assignee: nobody(a)fedoraproject.org Reporter: me(a)petetravis.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: jreznik(a)redhat.com, mclasen(a)redhat.com, nobody(a)fedoraproject.org, sparks(a)redhat.com, stickster(a)gmail.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Depends On: 998518 +++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #998518 +++ This is a tracking bug for Change: GNOME 3.10 For more details, see: http://fedoraproject.org//wiki/Changes/Gnome3.10 Update GNOME to the latest upstream release --- Additional comment from Matthias Clasen on 2013-08-23 10:44:03 EDT --- 3.9.90 is in f20 Discussion at https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel-announce/2013-July/001192.h… Please assess existing documentation for the impact of this Change. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 2

[Bug 1008219] New: Plasma-nm
by Red Hat Bugzilla 18 Jan '15

18 Jan '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1008219 Bug ID: 1008219 Summary: Plasma-nm Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: docs-requests Keywords: Tracking Assignee: nobody(a)fedoraproject.org Reporter: me(a)petetravis.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: jgrulich(a)redhat.com, jreznik(a)redhat.com, ltinkl(a)redhat.com, nobody(a)fedoraproject.org, sparks(a)redhat.com, stickster(a)gmail.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Depends On: 998531 +++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #998531 +++ This is a tracking bug for Change: Plasma-nm For more details, see: http://fedoraproject.org//wiki/Changes/Plasma-nm Replace current network applet in KDE with a new one and bring the latest news in NetworkManager to KDE. --- Additional comment from Lukáš Tinkl on 2013-08-20 08:27:16 EDT --- This change is currently fully working and in testable state, using: $ yum install kde-plasma-nm ------------------------------------------ Discussion at https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2013-July/185649.html Please assess existing documentation for the impact of this Change. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 2

[Bug 1008193] New: Developer Assistant GUI
by Red Hat Bugzilla 18 Jan '15

18 Jan '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1008193 Bug ID: 1008193 Summary: Developer Assistant GUI Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: docs-requests Keywords: Tracking Assignee: nobody(a)fedoraproject.org Reporter: me(a)petetravis.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: bkabrda(a)redhat.com, jreznik(a)redhat.com, nobody(a)fedoraproject.org, phracek(a)redhat.com, sparks(a)redhat.com, stickster(a)gmail.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Depends On: 998501 +++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #998501 +++ This is a tracking bug for Change: Developer Assistant GUI For more details, see: http://fedoraproject.org//wiki/Changes/DeveloperAssistantGUI The feature aims to provide GUI for devassistant package. --- Additional comment from Petr Hracek on 2013-08-23 03:53:55 EDT --- Main Developer Assistant GUI is finished and testable. Problem with aborting project creation was already solved. GUI for creation of user assistants depends on some devassistant-lint engine which is not implemented yet (will be in future). devassistant-lint program should check whether yaml assistant is correct and runnable by devassistant engine. Developer Assistant Creator GUI can be used only for beginners which do not want to use any command line or IDE editor for YAML files. Field "Fixed in Version" will be filled during next week when will be a new release --- Additional comment from Bohuslav "Slavek" Kabrda on 2013-08-28 07:57:30 EDT --- Testable in devassistant-0.6.1-2.fc20 by invoking "da-gui". --------------------------- Discussion at https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel-announce/2013-July/001190.h… Please assess existing documentation for the impact of this change. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 2

[Bug 1001359] New: python-setuptools update to 0.7.x and greater
by Red Hat Bugzilla 18 Jan '15

18 Jan '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1001359 Bug ID: 1001359 Summary: python-setuptools update to 0.7.x and greater Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: docs-requests Keywords: Tracking Assignee: nobody(a)fedoraproject.org Reporter: me(a)petetravis.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: a.badger(a)gmail.com, jreznik(a)redhat.com, nobody(a)fedoraproject.org, sparks(a)redhat.com, stickster(a)gmail.com, toshio(a)fedoraproject.org, zach(a)oglesby.co Depends On: 998574 +++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #998574 +++ This is a tracking bug for Change: python-setuptools update to 0.7.x and greater For more details, see: http://fedoraproject.org//wiki/Changes/Python_setuptools_0.7 Update to a new upstream release of python-setuptools that is not completely compatible with previous releases. The python-setuptools "major" version may be higher than 0.7.x as there's some other structural changes happening that should not affect API. --- Additional comment from Toshio Ernie Kuratomi on 2013-08-26 12:51:51 EDT --- Currently, no rawhide packages are known to be incompatible with the updated setuptools. Moving to MODIFIED. Discussion at https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel-announce/2013-June/001159.h… Please assess existing documentation for the impact of this Change. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 2

[Bug 1111447] New: authorized_keys guide wrong
by Red Hat Bugzilla 19 Dec '14

19 Dec '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1111447 Bug ID: 1111447 Summary: authorized_keys guide wrong Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: deployment-guide Assignee: jhradile(a)redhat.com Reporter: morten(a)tranebaerkaeret.dk QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: dhensley(a)redhat.com, jhradile(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Description of problem: It is not possible to make authorized_keys setup work by following the guide in the documentation How reproducible: Follow the guide on Fedora (I have tested on Fedora 18) Steps to Reproduce: 1. Create ssh key 2. Change key perm 755 3. Create authorized_keys 4. Change key perm to 644 Actual results: Is forced to enter password on ssh login Expected results: No need to enter password on ssh login Additional info: If permissions are changed to 700 and 600 respectively then no password key is required. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 1

[Bug 1076963] New: 9.14.5 Recommended Partition Scheme, outdated info
by Red Hat Bugzilla 16 Dec '14

16 Dec '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1076963 Bug ID: 1076963 Summary: 9.14.5 Recommended Partition Scheme, outdated info Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: install-guide Assignee: pbokoc(a)redhat.com Reporter: bugzilla(a)colorremedies.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: pbokoc(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Existing documentation with the problem is here: http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/20/html/Installation_Guide/s2-di… Here's a minimal list of problems and proposed changes for this page. 1. 9.14.5.1 recommends a layout the installer doesn't use by default. To fix it: a. Change "partitions" to "mount points", to be consistent with newui terminology, and to apply to either partitions or LVs since the default is swap, root, home on LV, and only boot is on a partition. 2. The first NOTE, under "A /boot/ partition (500 MB)": Let's just remove this. We haven't dealt with cylinders on drives for over 5 years, but rather Logical Block Addresses. I'm not sure what problem this is trying to solve, other than 2.2+TB drives in which case they need to be GPT and hope the BIOS doesn't puke. If it does, a separate /boot isn't going to fix it. Seems like very antiquated advice. 3. A root partition (3.0 GB - 5.0 GB) Change to 3 GB to 20 GB to be consistent with the body text "full desktop installation, a minimum of 20GB for the root partition is recommended". Please also drop the insignificant digit 4. Side bar "Root and /root" Both sentences are confusing, suggested rewrite: The / mount point is the top of the Linux Filesystem Hierarchy, and is referred to as the root file system, or root.The /root directory, sometimes pronounced "slash-root", is the home directory for the root user. *I consulted the v2.3 FHS to come up with this. 5. A home partition (at least 100 MB) 100MB is useless for gnome which is our default installation. Its indexer consumes 3GB for just one person. So if present, it needs to be a lot bigger than this or it should just be in /. 6. "To store user data separately from system data, create a dedicated partition within a volume group for the /home directory. This will enable you to upgrade or reinstall Fedora without erasing user data files." This is really confusing because it conflates partitions and Logical Volumes in one sentence. Rewrite as follows: "To store user data separately from system data, create a mount point for /home. This will enable you to reinstall Fedora without erasing user data." 7. "If you create many partitions instead of one large / partition, upgrades become easier." This should be removed as it's based on partitioning mythology/religion, not fact. We even say separate /usr is proscribed. Fewer volumes to assemble is less complex which is easier, but so long as we can upgrade what we permit users to create, the "ease" of upgrading should be the same and if not then it's a bug. I'd just strike this whole sentence. 8. 9.14.5.1.1 Advice on partitions. "Each kernel installed on your system requires approximately 220 MB on the /boot partition." Untrue. On /boot, kernel 3.14 takes up 18.1MB total. That includes config*, initramfs*, System.map*, and vmlinuz*. Debug kernel with a generic non-host initramfs is 45MB. Even fully installed (to both /boot and /lib) is 141MB. This should be changed to "approximately 25MB" which leaves a bit of headroom for growing kernel sizes. 9. Find all instances of "partition" and make sure we mean partition (i.e. related to an entry in the MBR or GPT) and not either "mount point" or "volume". Partition is not a good generic term for applying to Logical Volumes and Btrfs subvolumes. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 4

[Bug 1139176] New: kickstarts network command not know --biosdevname option
by Red Hat Bugzilla 16 Dec '14

16 Dec '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1139176 Bug ID: 1139176 Summary: kickstarts network command not know --biosdevname option Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: install-guide Assignee: pbokoc(a)redhat.com Reporter: mkolman(a)redhat.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: anaconda-maint-list(a)redhat.com, extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org, franta(a)hanzlici.cz, g.kaviyarasu(a)hotmail.com, jonathan(a)jonmasters.org, pbokoc(a)redhat.com, vanmeeuwen+fedora(a)kolabsys.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Depends On: 1135692 +++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #1135692 +++ Description of problem: starting F20 i386 installation from kickstart file which contain network command as: network --onboot=yes --noipv6 --bootproto=dhcp --biosdevname=0 --hostname=mypc ends with anaconda error: anaconda 20.25.15-1 for Fedora 20 started. The following problem occured on line 35 of the kickstart file: no such option: --biosdevname Expected results: option should be accepted. Perhaps should be created (template?) udev config rules file in /etc/udev/rules.d/ also. --- Additional comment from bcl(a)redhat.com on 2014-09-03 03:15:05 CEST --- --biosdevname is no a valid option. --- Additional comment from Frantisek Hanzlik on 2014-09-06 12:34:43 CEST --- Then is bug in Fedora 20 Installation Guide, where is (chapter 15.4. Kickstart Options) this parameter mentioned. Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1135692 [Bug 1135692] kickstarts network command not know --biosdevname option -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 2

[Bug 1029712] New: Suggestions for documentation improvement.
by Red Hat Bugzilla 16 Dec '14

16 Dec '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1029712 Bug ID: 1029712 Summary: Suggestions for documentation improvement. Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: install-guide Severity: low Assignee: pbokoc(a)redhat.com Reporter: r.landmann(a)redhat.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: lsatenstein(a)yahoo.com, me(a)petetravis.com, mmcallis(a)redhat.com, pbokoc(a)redhat.com, r.landmann(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Depends On: 994794 Thanks Leslie: Cloning to separate the Document Conventions suggestions from the Install Guide suggestions. +++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #994794 +++ Improvement recommendation for Install Guide. http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/19/html/Installation_Guide/Insta… Under 1.1. Typographic Conventions The indented paragraph reads To see the contents of the file my_next_bestselling_novel in your current working directory, enter the cat my_next_bestselling_novel command at the shell prompt and press Enter to execute the command. I would replace the word "see" with view. To view the contents of the... See for me, would be the result of issuing the ls command. See the file, view the contents. As an aside, for French translation, "to see" translates to "regarder" whereas view tranlates to "voir". A similar difference is with Spanish Please correct for Fedora 20. ====== Further on the same page... Warnings should not be ignored. Ignoring warnings will most likely cause data loss. My comment. Warnings do not cause data loss. Warnings advise of a situation that if not attended to, will most likely cause data loss. ======= Follow page with Introduction Introduction This guide covers installation of Fedora, a Linux distribution built on free and open source software. Please change ... built on ... to built with. My reasoning... You may be on topic, or build on a foundation, but Fedora is built with free and open source software ======= Another question. Would you say, "Install Fedora on a computer," or would you say "Install Fedora onto a computer"? My preference is to drop the "on a computer". That would shorten the sentence and accommodate some future hardware device. ======= 2.1.1. How Do I Download Installation Files? To follow a Web-based guide to downloading, visit http://get.fedoraproject.org/. For guidance on which architecture to download, refer to Section 2.1.2, “Which Architecture Is My Computer?”. Would the meaning be more clear if the title started with the word "Of" as in "Of which Architecture Is My Computer?" (sections 2.1.2 and 2.1.3) --- Additional comment from Pete Travis on 2013-08-08 20:59:31 EDT --- The "Typographic Conventions" content is defined by publican, the publishing tool used to create the guide. --- Additional comment from Leslie Satenstein on 2013-08-15 15:36:18 EDT --- In the installation guide, I noted that chapter two and following that "the discussion is about downloading the various versions of Fedora (netinstall, dvd, etc)." Then aas a follow up, there is a long discussion about which version of Fedora is the one to select from a list of options based on architecture and the like. Should not the latter documentation section precede the downloading information? As the comments in the guide were "for new users of Linux and experienced ones", the guide may (in my opinion) be presenting information that the individual should know about before downloading or acquiring any version. Most users of technical manuals do a two pass read. The first read is to get an appreciation of the product and guide, and the second pass is to follow the recipe. By following the recipe, it should be a) step one, determine your version and suitability of hardware b) step two determine the version of Fedora you want to install (32bit/64bit) etc. c) Download/acquire .... and so forth. The guide is almost in the step by step recipe sequence, If you go forward, would the improvements be present before Fedora 20,so the new sequence could be ready for a reviewer and his comments? And if you keep the sequence, I presume the update draft would also be ready for the reviewers and their comments. --- Additional comment from Leslie Satenstein on 2013-08-15 15:37:32 EDT --- In the installation guide, I noted that chapter two and following that "the discussion is about downloading the various versions of Fedora (netinstall, dvd, etc)." Then aas a follow up, there is a long discussion about which version of Fedora is the one to select from a list of options based on architecture and the like. Should not the latter documentation section precede the downloading information? As the comments in the guide were "for new users of Linux and experienced ones", the guide may (in my opinion) be presenting information that the individual should know about before downloading or acquiring any version. Most users of technical manuals do a two pass read. The first read is to get an appreciation of the product and guide, and the second pass is to follow the recipe. By following the recipe, it should be a) step one, determine your version and suitability of hardware b) step two determine the version of Fedora you want to install (32bit/64bit) etc. c) Download/acquire .... and so forth. The guide is almost in the step by step recipe sequence, If you go forward, would the improvements be present before Fedora 20,so the new sequence could be ready for a reviewer and his comments? And if you keep the sequence, I presume the update draft would also be ready for the reviewers and their comments. Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=994794 [Bug 994794] Suggestions for documentation improvement. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 2

[Bug 1149787] New: Add instructions for md5 hashing with powershell
by Red Hat Bugzilla 16 Dec '14

16 Dec '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1149787 Bug ID: 1149787 Summary: Add instructions for md5 hashing with powershell Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: install-guide Assignee: pbokoc(a)redhat.com Reporter: me(a)petetravis.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: pbokoc(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Powershell is the native scripting language available on all Windows 7 and Windows 8 machines, and it has functions for md5sum. Rather than refer to third party tools, we can post a short sample powershell script that will checksum the download. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 5

[Bug 1045205] New: post-f19 askmethod behavior should be documented
by Red Hat Bugzilla 16 Dec '14

16 Dec '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1045205 Bug ID: 1045205 Summary: post-f19 askmethod behavior should be documented Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: install-guide Severity: medium Assignee: pbokoc(a)redhat.com Reporter: me(a)petetravis.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: awilliam(a)redhat.com, g.kaviyarasu(a)hotmail.com, jonathan(a)jonmasters.org, kanarip(a)kanarip.com, maurizio.antillon(a)gmail.com, pbokoc(a)redhat.com, rtguille(a)gmail.com, sbueno(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Depends On: 889887 +++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #889887 +++ Description of problem: If one boots the netinstall to install over nfs (or anything that is not closest mirror) one needs to wait for closest mirror to be ready. In my case it is about 20 minutes, but that will be different for other people. The issue is that anaconda has already selected (correctly) closest mirror for the netinstall iso, but it is cannot be interrupted. I wanted to install from nfs source over wi-fi but i must wait my SLOW(TM) internet connection prior to selecting nfs as an INSTALLATION SOURCE. If anaconda has access to the internet, everything has to wait for closest mirror to be ready. Please, consider adding a small timeout that allows one to enter INSTALLATION DESTINATION to override the closes mirror. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): F18-TC2 How reproducible: always Steps to Reproduce: 1. boot anaconda netinstall 2. wait for closest mirror to be ready 3. select your nfs installation source and install. Actual results: long wait for an installation source to be setup which will not be used. Expected results: some time to enter INSTALLATION SOURCE and be able to select nfs (or other) without waiting for closest mirror. Additional info: --- Additional comment from Chris Lumens on 2013-01-22 15:30:11 EST --- I do somewhat agree, given that we've got this shiny installation source UI that we then don't really let you use. On the other hand, our threading/spoke stuff doesn't really work in this direction. Threads can wait on other things to be completed but there's not really any way to stop a thread when you enter a spoke. So, I think implementation of this would be very difficult. Would you settle for a check for the old "askmethod" command line parameter and not immediately fire up the mirror checking stuff if that parameter exists? --- Additional comment from Reartes Guillermo on 2013-01-23 16:46:11 EST --- > Would you settle for a check for the old "askmethod" command line parameter > and not immediately fire up the mirror checking stuff if that parameter exists? I have no objection for such proposal. The current workaround (Fedora Release NetInstall ISO) is: 1. Start Anaconda and reach the MAIN HUB 2. Enter NETWORK CONFGURATION and 'disable' the Network 3. Wait for INSTALLATION SOURCE to be back in 'Nothing Selected' 4. Enter NETWORK CONFGURATION and 'enable' the Network 5. Enter INSTALLATION SOURCE and now select NFS or other. In my test (KVM Guest) it works, but i don't know if this workaround do work with all network cards at them moment. (It should but there could be bugs). Since this workaround is somewhat simple, maybe it should be documented as the default way of aborting the automatic selection of closest mirror by Anaconda for NetInstall Images. In that case, nothing new is needed. Cheers. --- Additional comment from Adam Williamson on 2013-05-11 02:33:13 EDT --- Tested with F19 Beta TC3. The askmethod behaviour described in c#1 has been added. It works, though it's somewhat ugly: it leaves the Installation Source spoke in an 'error' condition. But it works. --- Additional comment from Adam Williamson on 2013-05-13 12:38:48 EDT --- Note, Reartes took the testing further than me, and found that if you actually try to complete an install with the new parameter, it fails: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=962098 . --- Additional comment from Reartes Guillermo on 2013-06-01 17:05:55 EDT --- There parameter 'askmethod', it is still not usable due to the issue in comment #3. Re-Tested with F19b RC4 (19.30-1) --- Additional comment from Adam Williamson on 2013-06-02 13:54:58 EDT --- How do you mean 'not usable'? It does what it's meant to do: lets you go into the spoke immediately. I wouldn't call that 'not usable'. ======================================== Also refer to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Anaconda_Boot_Options?rd=Anaconda/Options Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=889887 [Bug 889887] please add a small timeout in netinstall images for INSTALLATION SOURCE that permits one to override the 'closest mirror' selection (and the long wait it might imply) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 1

[Bug 1065771] New: Remove references to version numbers in package documentation directories
by Red Hat Bugzilla 16 Dec '14

16 Dec '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1065771 Bug ID: 1065771 Summary: Remove references to version numbers in package documentation directories Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: system-administrator's-guide Assignee: swadeley(a)redhat.com Reporter: sclark(a)fedoraproject.org QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: swadeley(a)redhat.com Created attachment 863833 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=863833&action=edit The attached archive contains patches to implement this change Following instructions in https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/UnversionedDocdirs remove the version number from the directory name for all references to any package documentation directory in /usr/share/doc , leaving just the package's name. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 3

[Bug 1136021] New: Rewrite the Making Media section
by Red Hat Bugzilla 15 Dec '14

15 Dec '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1136021 Bug ID: 1136021 Summary: Rewrite the Making Media section Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: install-guide Assignee: pbokoc(a)redhat.com Reporter: pbokoc(a)redhat.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: pbokoc(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Rewrite the Making Media section. It should include two major parts: * info on the various images available and what they do, and info on how to create a bootable DVD or USB drive on Linux, Mac and Windows, including checksum verification. This info should be taken from the RHEL 7 guide[1] and the now-retired Burning ISOs guide[2]. * info on creating install sources - how to prepare an ISO or an ostree on a webserver, ftp server, and a harddrive. Already documented in the RHEL 7 guide[1]. [1] https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/7/ht… [2] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/20/html/Burning_ISO_images_to_d… -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 3

[Bug 1136025] New: Rewrite/update the Kickstart Installations chapter
by Red Hat Bugzilla 15 Dec '14

15 Dec '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1136025 Bug ID: 1136025 Summary: Rewrite/update the Kickstart Installations chapter Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: install-guide Assignee: pbokoc(a)redhat.com Reporter: pbokoc(a)redhat.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: pbokoc(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Update the Kickstart chapter. Most of the surrounding text (howto) can be taken directly from RHEL7 Install Guide[1]. The Kickstart Syntax reference section can be taken from there as well, but note that many commands and options changed in Fedora since then, so it needs a review and additional work. Some of the changes are described in the F21 Release Notes on the wiki[2]. Also: It has been reported that currently the syntax reference is really hard to read and that it could use a table of contents. To do that, we should probably consider moving it to a separate chapter and either turning each command into its own section, or at least creating a few categories and sections for them - so that a ToC is generated at the top of the chapter. [1] https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/7/ht… [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Documentation_Beats_Installer -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 3

[Bug 1136028] New: Rewrite/update the Boot Options chapter
by Red Hat Bugzilla 15 Dec '14

15 Dec '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1136028 Bug ID: 1136028 Summary: Rewrite/update the Boot Options chapter Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: install-guide Assignee: pbokoc(a)redhat.com Reporter: pbokoc(a)redhat.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: pbokoc(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Update the Boot Options chapter. Most of the text can be taken directly from the RHEL7 Install Guide [1]. However, unlike the RHEL guide, the list of boot options should be separated into sections (so we get a table of contents and it's easier to navigate). Also review the currently documented options and make sure they match boot-options.txt[2]. [1] https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/7/ht… [2] https://git.fedorahosted.org/cgit/anaconda.git/tree/docs/boot-options.txt?h… -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 2

[Bug 1136035] New: Update the VNC chapter
by Red Hat Bugzilla 15 Dec '14

15 Dec '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1136035 Bug ID: 1136035 Summary: Update the VNC chapter Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: install-guide Assignee: pbokoc(a)redhat.com Reporter: pbokoc(a)redhat.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: pbokoc(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Current instructions on using VNC during the installations kind of work, but they're fairly confusing and a little too general. The VNC chapter has been completely rewritten in RHEL7[1], which means we just grab it and copy it into the Fedora guide - there should only be minimal differences. [1] https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/7/ht… -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 1

[Bug 1079540] New: Document SELinux sandboxing
by Red Hat Bugzilla 15 Dec '14

15 Dec '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1079540 Bug ID: 1079540 Summary: Document SELinux sandboxing Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: security-guide Assignee: sparks(a)redhat.com Reporter: me(a)petetravis.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: pkennedy(a)redhat.com, security-guide-list(a)redhat.com, sparks(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co What is SELinux sandboxing and why should I care? How do I do it? These questions and more should be covered in the Security Guide -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 1

[Bug 1008204] New: DNSSEC support for FreeIPA
by Red Hat Bugzilla 08 Dec '14

08 Dec '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1008204 Bug ID: 1008204 Summary: DNSSEC support for FreeIPA Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: docs-requests Keywords: Tracking Assignee: nobody(a)fedoraproject.org Reporter: me(a)petetravis.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: jreznik(a)redhat.com, nobody(a)fedoraproject.org, pspacek(a)redhat.com, sparks(a)redhat.com, stickster(a)gmail.com, tbabej(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Depends On: 998522 +++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #998522 +++ This is a tracking bug for Change: DNSSEC support for FreeIPA For more details, see: http://fedoraproject.org//wiki/Changes/IPAv3DNSSEC FreeIPA with integrated DNS server will support serving of DNSSEC secured zones. --- Additional comment from Tomas Babej on 2013-08-28 10:22:11 EDT --- This feature is self-contained and not in a testable state yet. It is planned for FreeIPA 3.4 Beta release which is aligned with the F20 schedule. --- Additional comment from Petr Spacek on 2013-09-02 07:18:58 EDT --- It is possible that we will not be able to complete the feature in time for Fedora 20 beta. From: http://fedoraproject.org//wiki/Changes/IPAv3DNSSEC#Contingency_Plan Contingency mechanism: Do not expose new feature in FreeIPA's user interface (i.e. revert patches for user interface) --- Additional comment from Jaroslav Reznik on 2013-09-04 08:28:20 EDT --- Ok, in case you won't be able to finish it by Beta Change Deadline (currently planned for 2013-10-08), let me know and put the bug to the NEW state, version to rawhide. Thanks for update! ----------------------------------------------- Discussion at https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel-announce/2013-July/001193.h… Please assess existing documentation for the impact of this Change. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 5

[Bug 1008203] New: DNSSEC support for FreeIPA
by Red Hat Bugzilla 08 Dec '14

08 Dec '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1008203 Bug ID: 1008203 Summary: DNSSEC support for FreeIPA Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: release-notes Keywords: Tracking Assignee: relnotes(a)fedoraproject.org Reporter: me(a)petetravis.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: jreznik(a)redhat.com, pspacek(a)redhat.com, relnotes(a)fedoraproject.org, tbabej(a)redhat.com, wb8rcr(a)arrl.net, zach(a)oglesby.co Depends On: 998522 +++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #998522 +++ This is a tracking bug for Change: DNSSEC support for FreeIPA For more details, see: http://fedoraproject.org//wiki/Changes/IPAv3DNSSEC FreeIPA with integrated DNS server will support serving of DNSSEC secured zones. --- Additional comment from Tomas Babej on 2013-08-28 10:22:11 EDT --- This feature is self-contained and not in a testable state yet. It is planned for FreeIPA 3.4 Beta release which is aligned with the F20 schedule. --- Additional comment from Petr Spacek on 2013-09-02 07:18:58 EDT --- It is possible that we will not be able to complete the feature in time for Fedora 20 beta. From: http://fedoraproject.org//wiki/Changes/IPAv3DNSSEC#Contingency_Plan Contingency mechanism: Do not expose new feature in FreeIPA's user interface (i.e. revert patches for user interface) --- Additional comment from Jaroslav Reznik on 2013-09-04 08:28:20 EDT --- Ok, in case you won't be able to finish it by Beta Change Deadline (currently planned for 2013-10-08), let me know and put the bug to the NEW state, version to rawhide. Thanks for update! ----------------------------------------------------------------- Discussion available at https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel-announce/2013-July/001193.h… Please document this Change in the Release Notes. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 6

[Bug 1107633] New: System-wide crypto policy
by Red Hat Bugzilla 08 Dec '14

08 Dec '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1107633 Bug ID: 1107633 Summary: System-wide crypto policy Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: security-guide Keywords: Documentation, ReleaseNotes Assignee: sparks(a)redhat.com Reporter: sparks(a)redhat.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: hkario(a)redhat.com, jreznik(a)redhat.com, nmavrogi(a)redhat.com, pkennedy(a)redhat.com, security-guide-list(a)redhat.com, sparks(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Depends On: 1076390 +++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #1076390 +++ This is a tracking bug for Change: System-wide crypto policy For more details, see: http://fedoraproject.org//wiki/Changes/CryptoPolicy Unify the crypto policies used by different applications and libraries. That is allow setting a consistent security level for crypto on all applications in a Fedora system. The implementation approach will be to initially modify SSL libraries to respect the policy and gradually adding more libraries and applications. --- Additional comment from Eric Christensen on 2014-03-24 13:40:11 EDT --- I wrote up something about this already (but can't find it) that can be used in the Release Notes and Security Guide. As soon as I can lay my hands on it, again, I'll post it for review. --- Additional comment from Eric Christensen on 2014-03-24 14:40:25 EDT --- This is the text I'd like to use for the Release Notes and Security Guide if it looks good to the feature owner. --- Additional comment from Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos on 2014-03-25 05:45:07 EDT --- Let's not update the release notes and manual yet, as the details are not yet fixed. I expect these to be fixed by the end of next month. --- Additional comment from Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos on 2014-06-03 07:26:05 EDT --- I've updated the proposed text for the release notes. <title>Crypto Policy</title> <para>Beginning in Fedora 21, a system-wide crypto policy will be available for users to quickly setup the cryptographic options for their systems. Users that must meet certain cryptographic standards can make the policy change in <filename>//etc/crypto-policies/config</filename>, and run update-crypto-policies. At this point applications that are utilize the default set of ciphers in the GnuTLS and OpenSSL libraries will follow the policy requirements.</para> <para>The available options are: (1) LEGACY, which ensures compatibility with legacy systems - 64-bit security, (2) DEFAULT, a reasonable default for today's standards - 80-bit security, and (3) FUTURE, a conservative level that is believed to withstand any near-term future attacks -128-bit security. These levels affect SSL/TLS settings, including elliptic curve, signature hash functions, and ciphersuites and key sizes.</para> <para>Additional information on this new feature can be found on the <ulink url="https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/CryptoPolicy">CryptoPolicy Changes wiki page</ulink>.</para> --- Additional comment from Eric Christensen on 2014-06-03 11:58:18 EDT --- (In reply to Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos from comment #4) Awesome, thanks! I've added it to the Security Beat (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Documentation_Security_Beat) and it should be in the Release Notes for F21. Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1076390 [Bug 1076390] System-wide crypto policy -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 2

[Bug 1002289] New: it is deprecated, right?
by Red Hat Bugzilla 07 Dec '14

07 Dec '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1002289 Bug ID: 1002289 Summary: it is deprecated, right? Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: translation-quick-start-guide Assignee: noriko(a)redhat.com Reporter: kraymond(a)shaiton.org QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: aalam(a)redhat.com, dimitris(a)glezos.com, mail(a)fabian-affolter.ch, noriko(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Hi, this guide is deprecated IMHO. The L10n team moved to the wiki while we moved from transifex.fedoraproject.org to fedora.transifex.net The new guide is at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/L10N/Guide I removed this guide from the fedora-docs release at transifex.com (but it's just a name to gather guides). The guide is still at https://fedora.transifex.com/projects/p/translation-quick-start-guide/ I can see that Raven has blocked the translations. nice. Please update (or close?) the fedorahosted repo https://fedorahosted.org/translation-quick-start-guide/ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 4

[Bug 1008575] New: Install Guide Tweaking
by Red Hat Bugzilla 06 Dec '14

06 Dec '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1008575 Bug ID: 1008575 Summary: Install Guide Tweaking Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: install-guide Severity: low Assignee: pbokoc(a)redhat.com Reporter: lsatenstein(a)yahoo.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: pbokoc(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Please consider corrections for Fedora 20 install guide. The following is my feedback for F19 Install guide. Description of problem: Improvement recommendation for Install Guide. http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/19/html/Installation_Guide/Insta… Under 1.1. Typographic Conventions The indented paragraph reads To see the contents of the file my_next_bestselling_novel in your current working directory, enter the cat my_next_bestselling_novel command at the shell prompt and press Enter to execute the command. I would replace the word "see" with view. To view the contents of the... For me, "see" would be the result of issuing the ls command. See the file, view the contents. As an aside, for French translation, "to see" translates to "regarder" whereas view translates to "voir". Il voit le contenu. Please correct for Fedora 20. ====== Further on the same page... Warnings should not be ignored. Ignoring warnings will most likely cause data loss. My comment. Warnings do not cause data loss. Warnings advise of a situation that if not attended to, will most likely cause data loss. ======= Follow page with Introduction Introduction This guide covers installation of Fedora, a Linux distribution built on free and open source software. Please change ... built on ... to built with. My reasoning... You may be on topic, or build on a foundation, but Fedora is built with free and open source software ======= Another question. Would you say, "Install Fedora on a computer," or would you say "Install Fedora onto a computer"? If the latter is more correct, this fragment is found within the Audience section. ======= 2.1.1. How Do I Download Installation Files? To follow a Web-based guide to downloading, visit http://get.fedoraproject.org/. For guidance on which architecture to download, refer to Section 2.1.2, “Which Architecture Is My Computer?”. Would the meaning be more clear if the title started with the word "Of" as in "Of which Architecture Is My Computer?" (sections 2.1.2 and 2.1.3) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 2

[Bug 1069985] New: Release notes should contain changes to kickstart options
by Red Hat Bugzilla 06 Dec '14

06 Dec '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1069985 Bug ID: 1069985 Summary: Release notes should contain changes to kickstart options Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: release-notes Assignee: relnotes(a)fedoraproject.org Reporter: edgar.hoch(a)ims.uni-stuttgart.de QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: relnotes(a)fedoraproject.org, wb8rcr(a)arrl.net, zach(a)oglesby.co Description of problem: Release notes for Fedora 20 contains nothing about the changes to kickstart options. It would be helpful if changes to kickstart options will be noticed in future release notes too. Now I know that I have to check the wiki diffs of the Anaconda/Kickstart wiki page to see the changes, but other administrators may check only the release notes. An example is the "--addsupport=" option to the "lang" kickstart option which was added to Fedora 20 (I assume... - I have no information about the time of the change), together with "%packages ... -instLangs=..." still not implemented. Please see also at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1051816#c11 Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): Fedora 20 release notes. How reproducible: Always. Another note: This request is to improve the next release notes. But I want to note that there should a place (web page, wiki page, etc.) too where additional (late) informations can be added to release notes of already released Fedora versions. Is such a place available? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 4

[Bug 1158767] New: RELNOTES - Certificates signed with MD5 algorithm are not verified anymore
by Red Hat Bugzilla 06 Dec '14

06 Dec '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1158767 Bug ID: 1158767 Summary: RELNOTES - Certificates signed with MD5 algorithm are not verified anymore Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: release-notes Assignee: relnotes(a)fedoraproject.org Reporter: tmraz(a)redhat.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: relnotes(a)fedoraproject.org, wb8rcr(a)arrl.net, zach(a)oglesby.co Blocks: 168083 (fc5-relnotes-traqr) OpenSSL was patched to disallow verification of certificates that are signed with MD5 algorithm. The use of MD5 hash algorithm for certificate signatures is now considered as insecure and thus all the main crypto libraries in Fedora were patched to reject such certificates. Certificates signed with MD5 algorithm are not present on public https web sites anymore but they can be still in use on private networks or used for authentication on openvpn based VPNs such as in bug 1157260. It is highly recommended to replace such certificates with new ones signed with SHA256 or at least SHA1. As a temporary measure the OPENSSL_ENABLE_MD5_VERIFY environment variable can be set to allow verification of certificates signed with MD5 algorithm. Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=168083 [Bug 168083] FC5 release notes tracker bug -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 2

[Bug 1060328] New: Fedora 20 Release Notes imply that rsyslog is no longer installed
by Red Hat Bugzilla 06 Dec '14

06 Dec '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1060328 Bug ID: 1060328 Summary: Fedora 20 Release Notes imply that rsyslog is no longer installed Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: release-notes Assignee: relnotes(a)fedoraproject.org Reporter: toby(a)ovod-everett.org QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: relnotes(a)fedoraproject.org, wb8rcr(a)arrl.net, zach(a)oglesby.co Description of problem: The Fedora 20 Release Notes imply that rsyslog is no longer installed (section 2.8.1) during normal installs. It appears, according to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Talk:Changes/NoDefaultSyslog, that it got moved from @core to @standard. However, I suspect that a lot of users will do installs that include @standard, and as a result they will get rsyslog installed and perhaps be confused as to why they got it when the Release Notes imply it is no longer included. I can confirm that the repodata/ac802acf81ab55a0eca1fe5d1222bd15b8fab45d302dfdf4e626716d374b6a64-Fedora-20-comps.xml file on the x86_64 install DVD contains rsyslog in the @standard package group. Also, https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Talk:Changes/NoDefaultSendmail implies that sendmail got moved from @core to @standard, whereas it appears to me that it actually got removed from both of them (at least I can't find it anywhere in the comps.xml file). Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): Fedora 20 x86_64 DVD. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 1

[Red Hat Bugzilla] Your Outstanding Requests
by Red Hat Bugzilla 24 Nov '14

24 Nov '14

The following is a list of requests people have made of you, which have been outstanding more than 7 days. To avoid disappointing others, please deal with them as quickly as possible. review ------ Bug 1124344: yum --security update doesn't work on non-fedora repos. This limitation is probably undocumented. (55 days old) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1124344 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=942713&action=edit To see all your outstanding requests, visit: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/request.cgi?action=queue&requestee=docs-qa%40li…

1 0

[Red Hat Bugzilla] Your Outstanding Requests
by Red Hat Bugzilla 17 Nov '14

17 Nov '14

The following is a list of requests people have made of you, which have been outstanding more than 7 days. To avoid disappointing others, please deal with them as quickly as possible. review ------ Bug 1124344: yum --security update doesn't work on non-fedora repos. This limitation is probably undocumented. (48 days old) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1124344 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=942713&action=edit To see all your outstanding requests, visit: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/request.cgi?action=queue&requestee=docs-qa%40li…

1 0

[Bug 1084400] Reset root password when booting with init=/bin/bash crash the system
by Red Hat Bugzilla 13 Nov '14

13 Nov '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1084400 Stephen Wadeley <swadeley(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |MODIFIED --- Comment #21 from Stephen Wadeley <swadeley(a)redhat.com> --- Please try this: 1. Start the system and, on the GRUB 2 boot screen, press the e key for edit. 2. Remove the rhgb and quiet parameters from the end, or near the end, of the linux16 line, or linuxefi on UEFI systems. Press Ctrl+a and Ctrl+e to jump to the start and end of the line, respectively. On some systems, Home and End might also work. Important The rhgb and quiet parameters must be removed in order to enable system messages. 3. Add the following parameter at the end of the linux16 line, or linuxefi on UEFI systems: init=/bin/sh The Linux kernel will run the /bin/sh shell rather than the system init daemon. Therefore, some functions may be limited or missing. 4. Press Ctrl+x to boot the system with the parameter. The shell prompt appears. 5. To preserve the SELinux context of the files that are to be modified, load the SELinux policy into the kernel. Use the -i option as this is the first time the policy is being loaded since boot: ~]# /usr/sbin/load_policy -i 6. The file system is mounted read-only. You will not be allowed to change the password if the file system is not writable. Remount the file system as writable: ~]# mount -o remount, rw / 7. Run the passwd command and follow the instructions displayed on the command line to change the root password. Note that if the system is not writable, the passwd tool fails with the following error: Authentication token manipulation error 8. Remount the file system as read only: ~]# mount -o remount, ro / 9. Run the exec /sbin/init command to resume the initialization and finish the system boot. Running the exec command with another command specified replaces the shell and creates a new process; init in this case. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Thank you -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 0

[Red Hat Bugzilla] Your Outstanding Requests
by Red Hat Bugzilla 10 Nov '14

10 Nov '14

The following is a list of requests people have made of you, which have been outstanding more than 7 days. To avoid disappointing others, please deal with them as quickly as possible. review ------ Bug 1124344: yum --security update doesn't work on non-fedora repos. This limitation is probably undocumented. (41 days old) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1124344 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=942713&action=edit To see all your outstanding requests, visit: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/request.cgi?action=queue&requestee=docs-qa%40li…

1 0

[Red Hat Bugzilla] Your Outstanding Requests
by Red Hat Bugzilla 03 Nov '14

03 Nov '14

The following is a list of requests people have made of you, which have been outstanding more than 7 days. To avoid disappointing others, please deal with them as quickly as possible. review ------ Bug 1124344: yum --security update doesn't work on non-fedora repos. This limitation is probably undocumented. (34 days old) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1124344 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=942713&action=edit To see all your outstanding requests, visit: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/request.cgi?action=queue&requestee=docs-qa%40li…

1 0

[Red Hat Bugzilla] Your Outstanding Requests
by Red Hat Bugzilla 03 Nov '14

03 Nov '14

The following is a list of requests people have made of you, which have been outstanding more than 7 days. To avoid disappointing others, please deal with them as quickly as possible. review ------ Bug 1124344: yum --security update doesn't work on non-fedora repos. This limitation is probably undocumented. (34 days old) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1124344 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=942713&action=edit To see all your outstanding requests, visit: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/request.cgi?action=queue&requestee=docs-qa%40li…

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

docs-qa November 2014