docs-qa June 2014

docs-qa@lists.fedoraproject.org

2 participants
160 discussions

[Bug 1071943] New: Manual does not compile in f20
by Red Hat Bugzilla 27 Jun '14

27 Jun '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1071943 Bug ID: 1071943 Summary: Manual does not compile in f20 Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: defensive-coding-guide Assignee: fweimer(a)redhat.com Reporter: nmavrogi(a)redhat.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: fweimer(a)redhat.com, sparks(a)redhat.com Description of problem: Does not compile How reproducible: In f20, after installing publican" and the "publican-fedora" packages, try "make build-manual". Output: ... Can't open file 'tmp/en-US/xml_tmp/Web_Applications.xml' not well-formed (invalid token) at line 46, column 43, byte 2693: Won't be escaped (DON'T DO THIS!) <h:outputText value="#{param.name}" escape=false> ==========================================^ </code> at /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/XML/Parser.pm line 187. at /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Publican/Builder/DocBook4.pm line 484. make: *** [build-manual] Error 255 using escape="false" instead fixes the issue, but different errors show up. I'm not familiar with docbook to provide a fix. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 1

[Bug 1035500] New: F19 security guide - iptables intallation command is wrong
by Red Hat Bugzilla 27 Jun '14

27 Jun '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1035500 Bug ID: 1035500 Summary: F19 security guide - iptables intallation command is wrong Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: security-guide Assignee: sparks(a)redhat.com Reporter: maxime.carron(a)fedoraproject.org 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 Description of problem: The command to install iptables-services is wrong in fedora 19 documentation Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): Current version (fedora 19), security guide, chapter "3.8.9.1. Using the iptables service" link : http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/19/html/Security_Guide/sec-Disab… Actual results: quote : Then install the iptables-service package by entering the following command as root: ~]# iptables-service Expected results: The command should be : yum install iptables-services -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 2

[Bug 995595] New: Allocators.xml
by Red Hat Bugzilla 27 Jun '14

27 Jun '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=995595 Bug ID: 995595 Summary: Allocators.xml Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: defensive-coding-guide Assignee: fweimer(a)redhat.com Reporter: Geodebay(a)gmail.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: fweimer(a)redhat.com, sparks(a)redhat.com Description of problem: In Allocators.xml, line 135 to 138, you write: " .... For instance, to allocate an array of <literal>n</literal> elements of type <literal>T</literal>, check that the requested size is not greater than <literal>n / sizeof(T)</literal>." It is not rather? " .... For instance, to allocate an array of <literal>n</literal> elements of type <literal>T</literal>, check that the requested size is not smaller than <literal>n * sizeof(T)</literal>." Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How reproducible: Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3. Actual results: Expected results: Additional info: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 4

[Bug 1030257] New: Typo Fedora Amateur Radio Guide
by Red Hat Bugzilla 27 Jun '14

27 Jun '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1030257 Bug ID: 1030257 Summary: Typo Fedora Amateur Radio Guide Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: amateur-radio-guide Assignee: wb8rcr(a)arrl.net Reporter: ikhyar.com(a)gmail.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: sparks(a)redhat.com, wb8rcr(a)arrl.net, zach(a)oglesby.co Description of problem: in transifex contain space typos in words "e dge" to "edge" Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): transifex How reproducible: - Steps to Reproduce: - 1. 2. 3. Actual results: e dge Expected results: edge Additional info: Thanks for correcting these typos. https://fedora.transifex.com/projects/p/fedora-amateur-radio-guide/ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 3

[Bug 892673] New: UEFI Secure Boot Guide: suggestions for edits
by Red Hat Bugzilla 27 Jun '14

27 Jun '14

Product: Fedora Documentation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=892673 Bug ID: 892673 Summary: UEFI Secure Boot Guide: suggestions for edits Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: uefi-secure-boot-guide Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Reporter: fweimer(a)redhat.com Replace: "With the planned release of Windows 8, Microsoft has decided that all hardware that is marked "Windows 8 client ready" should" With: "Microsoft requires that client devices carrying the Windows 8 logo must" Replace: "This means that Fedora as it stands booted on such hardware will refuse to boot until the user disables secure boot in the firmware." With: "The UEFI boot loader on Fedora installation media and on the installed system are signed with the Microsoft key, to enable booting and installation on such systems." Remove the following paragraph, ending in "This plan has been approved by the Fedora Engineering Steering Committee as of 23-Jul-2012." After: "any operations from userland which cause userland-defined DMA" Insert: "disable support for hibernate/suspend-to-disk, and other features which would allow executing arbitrary code in kernel mode (even for the root user)." -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 1

[Bug 782916] New: value of security measures; no metric, no scope description
by Red Hat Bugzilla 27 Jun '14

27 Jun '14

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: value of security measures; no metric, no scope description https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=782916 Summary: value of security measures; no metric, no scope description Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Component: security-guide AssignedTo: eric(a)christensenplace.us ReportedBy: budden(a)nps.navy.mil QAContact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: pkennedy(a)redhat.com, eric(a)christensenplace.us, security-guide-list(a)redhat.com, oglesbyzm(a)gmail.com Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Description of problem: The juncture between computer security and network security is inadequate -- too many seams which leaves too many man-in-middle attack opportunities. The most egregious omission in this (otherwise pretty good) document is treatment of SCOPE. This probably belongs in the vicinity of 1.3. Analysis first. Map each of the security solutions you have in the guide onto the ISO Reference Model: Layer 1/2 security measures (like WiFi security) protect frames. The scope of the security is limited to a single segment. No security beyond the router and no security within end systems. Layer 3 security protected datagrams (VPNs do this, IPSec ....). The scope is an enclave tunneled through an internetwork. The protection cannot extend beyond the VPN boxes, so data is wholly unprotected within end systems (and LAN if the VPN box is associated with the last router). Layer 4/5 security includes SSL (aka TLS). You have a how-to for securing an http server (good) but no admonitions regarding scope -- the security extends from the TCP socket in one end system to the TCP socket at the other end of the connection -- again no security inside the OS comes from SSL. All of the above security measures protect infrastructure. But they do not protect the data. Layer 6/7 security measures protect the data. Here the scope _can be_ truly end to end. S/MIME is a good example (so is ssh and XML sign/crypt) where the data passes over the internet and through the OS in protected form. Only in a fairly small space is the data unprotected. In Evolution, for example, only the parts of the UA that deal with composing, reading, ... mail are places where the authenticity and confidentiality of the data is possible. Most of the rest of the UA (including all the filing system deals with data that has been protected exactly the way it's been sent over the network. In the case of Evolution (UAs differ in implementation) secured data is stored in the file system exactly the way it was transmitted. Recommendations: 1) include a mapping similar to above so users have an idea what the scope of this or that security measure is. 2) emphasize those security measures that apply to applications (layer 6/7) as Fedora distribution evolves and matures. (What got me here this morning is the continuing frustration getting Evolution to properly play ball with DoD CAC cards ... works, but doesn't 'just work'). Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): Security Guide 16.3 (doesn't have a date) How reproducible: The above analysis doesn't invent anything; it only organizes and sorts. Anyone can reproduce it. Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3. Actual results: Expected results: Additional info: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.

1 2

[Bug 1084400] Reset root password when booting with init=/bin/bash crash the system
by Red Hat Bugzilla 24 Jun '14

24 Jun '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1084400 --- Comment #20 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek(a)in.waw.pl> --- (In reply to sylock from comment #18) > Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek, the wiki page for Fedora should be re-written a > little because the procedure is not clear: > https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=How_to_reset_a_root_password Yeah, using rescue mode for password changes is pointless in F19+. I've rewritten the section describing only init=/bin/bash, as this should work on all machines. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1005452] New: Outdated information
by Red Hat Bugzilla 19 Jun '14

19 Jun '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1005452 Bug ID: 1005452 Summary: Outdated information Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: rpm-guide Severity: medium Assignee: bcotton+fedora(a)gmail.com Reporter: cickumqt(a)gmail.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: bcotton+fedora(a)gmail.com, pkovar(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Quoted from http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora_Draft_Documentation/0.1/html/RPM…: The RPM bindings for Python are documented along with the C programming API. On a Red Hat Linux system, look in the file /usr/share/doc/rpm-devel-4.1/apidocs/html/group__python.html to see the start of the Python-specific documentation. Note that much of this online documentation covers the C functions that provide the Python bindings, not the Python API itself. But, if you examine the online information on objects listed as classes, such as rpmts, you can find the Python-specific documentation. Furthermore, if you look into the .c files that make up the Python bindings, you can find PyMethodDef structure tables. These tables provide useful glimpses into the Python API. To learn more about programming in Python, install the python-docs package. The python-docs package has a large set of online documentation for Python, including the official Python Tutorial. With Red Hat Linux, start at /usr/share/doc/python-docs-2.2.1/html/tut/tut.html. Cross Reference Other tutorials are available at http://diveintopython.org for the Dive Into Python tutorial for experienced programmers, and at http://py.vaults.ca/parnassus/apyllo.py/935043691.636055170 for the Vaults of Parnassus listing of tutorials. I think we need to update some words like RPM4.1, /usr/share/doc/python-docs-2.2.1 (F20 docdir changes) and Red Hat Linux .... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 1

Review CryptoPolicy addition to Security Guide
by Eric Christensen 10 Jun '14

10 Jun '14

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 I'd very much appreciate someone looking at the patch[0] I've submitted for the Security Guide adding text for the CryptoPolicy feature. This is the same text I've proposed using for the Release Notes. Please provide feedback via the open ticket[1]. Thanks! [0] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=907165 [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1107633 - -- Eric - -------------------------------------------------- Eric "Sparks" Christensen Fedora Project sparks(a)fedoraproject.org - sparks(a)redhat.com 097C 82C3 52DF C64A 50C2 E3A3 8076 ABDE 024B B3D1 - -------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQGcBAEBCgAGBQJTluuBAAoJEB/kgVGp2CYv838L/iT2Pzp7Gu+mD0LivxhPxvnn Ih9WvuTO0AJ9GKp692jghLnhy+KPENzIk71zVNRyojc6pEbN6+9wtE3SWTWtM49u DLUGrvBsC8iiLZCM2+I3WJV+uVG8KysuPNwvaC4bM/OatUKDsCeWiRTm8q8Df5BB vHuBbNYEG9dH2Z8nVbjY4mFoSIe/0Qrsr1YpKqtGYhMtdX/L3lZy8ti0YU1RvUD1 l2SQpcC/sWpWQV3Y/mxJAgXetGiGowZKiLsXO2vj4PraGcruDRkvwJi6NHPgOjIA fi0RwVoPT8hcclFpXivi2LmffdIL+lG5OJPNzFSlv5nq48ZRDp2F1J4zS8s8goaQ YZhtcYVdKXuZCWpZyqo1sSEuBAl16svfsXXmgcHs5Zk7vmz06DIIIEtEbzDh/L/D Z3Liiq7jKy5hhatKNsiHDGuCh+VxsFasXqniR8v3gqEqUdz2dkBjAn9dfU5Lp/ZF txSKbF8+UwA9B2fK+RVVWAQ7nf9FoewV1SZJ1Y3J3A== =ynf1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

[Bug 929426] firewalld: forward chain
by Red Hat Bugzilla 09 Jun '14

09 Jun '14

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=929426 --- Comment #6 from Frank Ansari <mail(a)frank-ansari.de> --- Because I did not know this. Today I again tried to figure it out and found it. Also I found I could make it permanent with /etc/firewalld/direct.xml. <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> <direct> [ <rule ipv="ipv6" table="filter" chain="FORWARD_direct" priority="0"> -p tcp --dport 22 -j ACCEPT </rule> ] </direct> This is working. In this documentation https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FirewallD the "direct" method is mentioned but not the direct.xml file. The main problem is: how shall one know that you have to check for the keyword "direct" when you want want to do forwarding? In the documentation you only find "port forwarding" when you search for the keyword "forward". Here where I found it: http://superuser.com/questions/654687/how-to-allow-forwarding-with-firewall… This was the right clue. Something like this should be added to the documentation. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 0

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

docs-qa June 2014