[Bug 1008219] New: Plasma-nm
by Red Hat Bugzilla
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.
9 years, 4 months
[Bug 1008193] New: Developer Assistant GUI
by Red Hat Bugzilla
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...
Please assess existing documentation for the impact of this change.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
9 years, 4 months
[Bug 1001359] New: python-setuptools update to 0.7.x and greater
by Red Hat Bugzilla
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...
Please assess existing documentation for the impact of this Change.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
9 years, 4 months
[Bug 1076963] New: 9.14.5 Recommended Partition Scheme, outdated info
by Red Hat Bugzilla
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-...
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.
9 years, 5 months
[Bug 1029712] New: Suggestions for documentation improvement.
by Red Hat Bugzilla
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/Ins...
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.
9 years, 5 months
[Bug 1045205] New: post-f19 askmethod behavior should be documented
by Red Hat Bugzilla
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.
9 years, 5 months
[Bug 1079540] New: Document SELinux sandboxing
by Red Hat Bugzilla
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.
9 years, 5 months
[Bug 1008204] New: DNSSEC support for FreeIPA
by Red Hat Bugzilla
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...
Please assess existing documentation for the impact of this Change.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
9 years, 5 months
[Bug 1008203] New: DNSSEC support for FreeIPA
by Red Hat Bugzilla
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...
Please document this Change in the Release Notes.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
9 years, 5 months