July 2015 - docs-qa - Fedora mailing-lists

[Bug 1180524] New: confining users section unclear
by Red Hat Bugzilla 04 Dec '15

04 Dec '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180524 Bug ID: 1180524 Summary: confining users section unclear Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: selinux-user-guide Assignee: mprpic(a)redhat.com Reporter: nmavrogi(a)redhat.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: mprpic(a)redhat.com, pkennedy(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co The section 6 (confining users) in Fedora 21 documentation of SELinux is very unclear. 1. What does confining mean actually? How are they confined? What capabilities these user lose? These are crucial information, never discussed in the text. 2. In fedora with "seinfo -u" I see several selinux users. These, along with the limitation each has, are never discussed. 3. "6.5. xguest: Kiosk Mode": I miss some technical info on the restrictions of the xguest account. What that user can't do and what can it do. Without that information the text could just say, trust us we've done everything for you (nothing bad with it, except that in technical documentation you expect more). 4. I miss a "confining a server process/app" section. This is a very common usage for selinux but no information is provided about that at all. Can I put some server in a confined state, as the documentation discusses with the user? Do we provide some preconfigured selinux users, roles, types for that purpose? What about the sandbox tool we ship? That would be the information I'd expect from such a section. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 3

[Bug 1180142] New: issues in the introduction of selinux-user-guide
by Red Hat Bugzilla 03 Dec '15

03 Dec '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180142 Bug ID: 1180142 Summary: issues in the introduction of selinux-user-guide Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: selinux-user-guide Assignee: mprpic(a)redhat.com Reporter: nmavrogi(a)redhat.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: mprpic(a)redhat.com, pkennedy(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co [Originally sent to authors of the document] I was trying to understand selinux using that guide, and had quite some issues in the introduction. I send you my issues in the hope they will help to improve the text. ------------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 2. Introduction to SELinux: I couldn't really understand what is selinux based on this section. It says it is mandatory access control mechanism, and then it goes into length explaining the 'Discretionary Access Control (DAC) system' used typically in Linux. That's nice if you already know what selinux is, because you can see the difference, but the opposite what I'd expect at the moment since I have no idea what selinux is. My suggestion would be to add the description I saw in https://www.imperialviolet.org/2009/07/14/selinux.html "SELinux is fundamentally about answering questions of the form “May x do y to z?” and enforcing the result (x is subject, z is object) ... The action (y) boils down to a class and a permission. Each class can have up to 32 permissions (because they are stored as a bitmask in a 32-bit int). Examples of classes are FILE, TCP_SOCKET and X_EVENT. For the FILE class, some examples of permissions are READ, WRITE, LOCK etc." At least for me that was all the information that I needed to understand what I can do with SELinux. A complete pictures may require to go into a bit more length with explaining what can be a subject, object and actions. Then mentioning about MAC and explaining it in addition to DAC will be more natural IMO. --------------------------------------------------------------------- 2.1. Benefits of running SELinux This is section vaguely defines domain. I reached "3.1. Domain Transitions" and didn't know what a domain was. Maybe add a definition of domain in 3.1 or earlier in the introduction. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3. SELinux Contexts level: It explains that in Fedora there is a single sensitivity and multiple categories. I miss what are these categories intended to be used to? An example with two different categories would be helpful. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 2

[Bug 1231578] New: No valid SHA1 checksums in checksum file
by Red Hat Bugzilla 27 Nov '15

27 Nov '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1231578 Bug ID: 1231578 Summary: No valid SHA1 checksums in checksum file Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: install-guide Assignee: pbokoc(a)redhat.com Reporter: misterfluff(a)me.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: pbokoc(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Description of problem: Following the installation procedure for Fedora 22 the section in 3,3,2 (verifying checksums on Linux and OS X systems) fails. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): Fedora-Live-Scientific_KDE-x86_64-22-3.iso How reproducible: 100% Steps to Reproduce: 1. Download Fedora-Live-Scientific_KDE-x86_64-22-3.iso from spins page 2. Download Fedora-Spins-x86_64-22-CHECKSUM 3. shasum -a 256 -c *CHECKSUM Actual results: Fedora-Spins-x86_64-22-CHECKSUM: no properly formatted SHA1 checksum lines found Expected results: Success, of course...:) Additional info: Additional checksum file Fedora-Workstation-22-x86_64-CHECKSUM file gave same result. Also performed "curl https://getfedora.org/static/fedora.gpg | gpg --import" with no change in eventual result. Is the process the same for checking a spin install versus the regular workstation? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 1

[Bug 1222305] New: Release notes scattered with references to YUM. DNF replaces yum
by Red Hat Bugzilla 10 Nov '15

10 Nov '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1222305 Bug ID: 1222305 Summary: Release notes scattered with references to YUM. DNF replaces yum Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: release-notes Severity: high Assignee: relnotes(a)fedoraproject.org Reporter: lsatenstein(a)yahoo.com 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 release notes on the web are not current and do not match the Fedora 22 release. The release notes within the Fedora 22 /usr/share/doc are also refering to Fedora 19 in places. In preparation for Fedora 22 release notes it looks like someone searched for Fedora 21 and changed the 21 to 22. 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 2

[Bug 1008149] New: Contraficting info about the need of shared storage for storing guest images to be migrated
by Red Hat Bugzilla 06 Nov '15

06 Nov '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1008149 Bug ID: 1008149 Summary: Contraficting info about the need of shared storage for storing guest images to be migrated Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: virtualization-getting-started-guide Assignee: dayleparker(a)redhat.com Reporter: jrodrigosm(a)yahoo.es QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: dayleparker(a)redhat.com, docs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Hi, In the Fedora 19 "Virtualization Getting Started Guide", section 2.2 ("What is migration?"), URL http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/19/html/Virtualization_Getting_S… In the paragraph right before the 2.2.1 title, it is stated that "In Fedora 19, shared storage is not necessary for storing guest images to be migrated. With live storage migration [...]". But in the last paragraph of the page, right before the note, it is stated that "Shared, networked storage must be used for storing guest images to be migrated. Without shared storage, migration is not possible." These two statements seem contradictory to me. I just started learning about virtualization, so I am unable to propose an alternative. But I do think some clarification is needed. Thanks, Rodrigo -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 2

[Bug 1206351] New: dnf conversion tracker bug
by Red Hat Bugzilla 05 Nov '15

05 Nov '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1206351 Bug ID: 1206351 Summary: dnf conversion tracker bug Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: docs-requests Assignee: nobody(a)fedoraproject.org Reporter: striker(a)redhat.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: nobody(a)fedoraproject.org, sparks(a)redhat.com, stickster(a)gmail.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Additional information: Tracker for individual documentation blockers. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 15

[Bug 1206805] New: convert yum commands to dnf commands - System Administrators Guide
by Red Hat Bugzilla 05 Nov '15

05 Nov '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1206805 Bug ID: 1206805 Summary: convert yum commands to dnf commands - System Administrators Guide Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: system-administrator's-guide Assignee: swadeley(a)redhat.com Reporter: striker(a)redhat.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: swadeley(a)redhat.com External Bug ID: Red Hat Bugzilla 1206351 External Bug ID: Red Hat Bugzilla 1206351 Description of problem: http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora_Draft_Documentation/0.1/html/Sys… 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 5

[Bug 1193135] New: Review Comments on Multiboot Guide version 0.1
by Red Hat Bugzilla 03 Nov '15

03 Nov '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193135 Bug ID: 1193135 Summary: Review Comments on Multiboot Guide version 0.1 Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: multiboot-guide Severity: low Assignee: chris.roberts(a)croberts.org Reporter: scmccann2000(a)gmail.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: chris.roberts(a)croberts.org Created attachment 992259 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=992259&action=edit smccann comments to multiboot guide. Attaching a pdf with a few comments from the perspective of a newbie to both Fedora and multiboot. In general, very readable and understandable guide! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 2

[Bug 1180202] New: Overlap with uefi-secure-boot-guide
by Red Hat Bugzilla 03 Nov '15

03 Nov '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180202 Bug ID: 1180202 Summary: Overlap with uefi-secure-boot-guide Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: multiboot-guide Assignee: chris.roberts(a)croberts.org Reporter: fweimer(a)redhat.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: chris.roberts(a)croberts.org With the recent updates, there is now some overlap with the UEFI Secure Boot guide. I'm not sure the current state of Secure Boot is useful for non-dual-boot systems, considering the feature loss and the lack of additional security due to buggy kernels and permissive signed bootloaders from other vendors. Perhaps merging the UEFI Secure Boot guide into the multiboot guide makes sense? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 1

[Bug 1086052] New: Include a section on using the Live media for rescue
by Red Hat Bugzilla 03 Nov '15

03 Nov '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1086052 Bug ID: 1086052 Summary: Include a section on using the Live media for rescue Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: install-guide Assignee: pbokoc(a)redhat.com Reporter: sanjay.ankur(a)gmail.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: pbokoc(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Description of problem: The install guide contains a section that documents how one can use the rescue mode off the dvd. It doesn't document how one can use the live media for simple rescue operations. The most common use case is when people install Window after installing Fedora off a live media. They lose grub, and they can't figure out how to use the live media to reinstall it. There are a couple of blog posts that document it. For example: http://thecreationist.expertscolumn.com/article/recover-grub-using-fedora-l… It would maybe be a good idea to have a section in docs that provides hints on how the live cd can be used for basic rescue operations. Thanks, Warm regards, Ankur -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 5

[Bug 1162233] New: http://beeblebrox.org/ appears to be dead
by Red Hat Bugzilla 02 Nov '15

02 Nov '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1162233 Bug ID: 1162233 Summary: http://beeblebrox.org/ appears to be dead Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: readme-burning-isos Assignee: zach(a)oglesby.co Reporter: rbiba(a)redhat.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: stickster(a)gmail.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Description of problem: HashTab can't be downloaded from http://beeblebrox.org/ because the page fails to load. It seems the site has been decommissioned. The software is now available from https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/hashtab/id517065482 or http://implbits.com/products/hashtab/. Note that implbits.com is also the first Google search result for beeblebrox.org or hashtab. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 3

[Bug 982906] New: 7.3.2. Establishing a Wireless Connection
by Red Hat Bugzilla 22 Oct '15

22 Oct '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=982906 Bug ID: 982906 Summary: 7.3.2. Establishing a Wireless Connection Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: system-administrator's-guide Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Assignee: jhradile(a)redhat.com Reporter: im_dracula(a)hotmail.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: jhradile(a)redhat.com Description of problem: Section 7.3.2 under the heading: 'Saving Your New (or Modified) Connection and Making Further Configurations' it states: "You can further configure an existing connection by selecting it in the Network Connections window and clicking Edit to return to the Editing dialog." This could be clarified by stating that network connections can be found under: activities --> applications --> sundry --> network connections -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 4

[Bug 1247255] New: Typo in Keyboard Layout - wrong side of the list
by Red Hat Bugzilla 21 Oct '15

21 Oct '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1247255 Bug ID: 1247255 Summary: Typo in Keyboard Layout - wrong side of the list Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: install-guide Assignee: pbokoc(a)redhat.com Reporter: josef.hruska(a)upcmail.cz QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: pbokoc(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Description of problem: There is a wrong side of "a window listing all currently configured layouts" in the Keyboard Layout section of the IG. The IG now reads "The right half of the screen contains a window listing all currently configured layouts." However, the window is actually on the left side. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. See the line 33 of the KeyboardSpoke.xml 2. 3. Actual results: The right half of the screen contains a window listing all currently configured layouts. Expected results: The left half of the screen contains a window listing all currently configured layouts. Additional info: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 2

[Bug 1192174] New: Unhelpful links on LXDE spin page
by Red Hat Bugzilla 20 Oct '15

20 Oct '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1192174 Bug ID: 1192174 Summary: Unhelpful links on LXDE spin page Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: install-guide Severity: medium Assignee: pbokoc(a)redhat.com Reporter: jhhaynes(a)earthlink.net QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: pbokoc(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Description of problem: Several "how to use this file" links on the LXDE spins web page simply point to the top Fedora documentation page. This is unhelpful when you need to know how to use this file. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): F21 How reproducible: always Steps to Reproduce: 1.Bring up F21 LXDE spin web page 2.Click on any "how to use this file link" 3. Actual results: Gets to top of Fedora documentation tree Expected results: Should tell exactly how to use this file Additional info: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 2

[Bug 1247229] New: Typo in Date & Time section - misspelled NTP
by Red Hat Bugzilla 19 Oct '15

19 Oct '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1247229 Bug ID: 1247229 Summary: Typo in Date & Time section - misspelled NTP Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: install-guide Assignee: pbokoc(a)redhat.com Reporter: josef.hruska(a)upcmail.cz QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: pbokoc(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Description of problem: There is a misspelled Network Time Protocol in the Date & Time section of the IG. The IG now reads, in the 5th para/message about setting the Network Time, Network Time PROTOL. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. See line 36 of the DateTimeSpoke.xml 2. 3. Actual results: Network Time Protol (NTP) Expected results: Network Time Protocol (NTP) Additional info: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 1

[Bug 1152883] New: Local replication of Product installation trees
by Red Hat Bugzilla 19 Oct '15

19 Oct '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1152883 Bug ID: 1152883 Summary: Local replication of Product installation trees 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 It doesn't look like there will be a DVD image, the traditional source in our instructions for site-provided installation repos. Consider conjuring up a procedure explaining how an administrator could obtain a mirror of the installation tree for each Product (whatever anaconda is pointed at for the netinstalls) without having to pull in the entire repo. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 2

[Bug 1244513] New: dnf rebuild --what to do to recover from database crash
by Red Hat Bugzilla 28 Sep '15

28 Sep '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1244513 Bug ID: 1244513 Summary: dnf rebuild --what to do to recover from database crash Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: system-administrator's-guide Severity: high Assignee: swadeley(a)redhat.com Reporter: lsatenstein(a)yahoo.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: swadeley(a)redhat.com Description of problem: Part way through dnf update the application emitted an error message along with instructions to perform a dnf rebuild. dnf rebuild is not in the man pages, or in Fedora Documents that I looked at. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How reproducible: Random or when dnf encounters a database inconsistancy Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3. Actual results: No information within Fedora documentation. Found information on the web Expected results: dnf rebuild should be part of the internal dnf options and should also be included in the man/info pages. Additional info: Found this information on the web... http://www.cyberciti.biz/tips/rebuilding-corrupted-rpm-database.html rm -rf /var # cd /var/lib # rm __db* Rebuild RPM database: # rpm --rebuilddb # rpmdb_verify Packages -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 7

[Bug 979158] New: Windows Virtio Drivers version 1-59 blue screens windows when you hot add virtio drives
by Red Hat Bugzilla 28 Sep '15

28 Sep '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979158 Bug ID: 979158 Summary: Windows Virtio Drivers version 1-59 blue screens windows when you hot add virtio drives Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: virtualization-deployment-guide Severity: high Priority: unspecified Assignee: lbailey(a)redhat.com Reporter: robert.rupert(a)servicemesh.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: lbailey(a)redhat.com Description of problem: Windows Blue Screens in KVM when using the latest virtio driver 1-59. When hot adding scsi drive Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How reproducible: fresh install with virtio scsi driver 1-59,=. Then hot add virtio scsi driver in windows 7, 2008r2 and 2012 Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3. Actual results: Expected results: Additional info: using the previose version 1-52 works fine -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 2

[Red Hat Bugzilla] Your Outstanding Requests
by Red Hat Bugzilla 27 Jul '15

27 Jul '15

The following is a list of bugs or attachments to bugs in which a user has been waiting more than 7 days for a response from you. Please take action on these requests as quickly as possible. (Note that some of these bugs might already be closed, but a user is still waiting for your response.) We'll remind you again in another 7 days if these requests are still outstanding, or if there are any new requests where users have been waiting more than 7 days for your response. review ------ Bug 1124344: yum --security update doesn't work on non-fedora repos. This limitation is probably undocumented. (300 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 999762] New: Java FAQ
by Red Hat Bugzilla 21 Jul '15

21 Jul '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=999762 Bug ID: 999762 Summary: Java FAQ Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: release-notes Severity: low Assignee: relnotes(a)fedoraproject.org Reporter: pcsnow(a)gmail.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: relnotes(a)fedoraproject.org, wb8rcr(a)arrl.net, zach(a)oglesby.co Description of problem: Parts of Java FAQ may need some updates. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Java/FAQ?rd=JavaFAQ Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):19 How reproducible: Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3. Actual results: Expected results: Additional info: 1. JPackage does not seem updated since 2009 2. Intelllij complains that non-sun version has performance problems during install and recommends against use of OpenJDK. 3. It might be helpful to provide some assistance in docs to allow easy integration of Oracle Java using system-switch-java. The FAQ does not mention switch-java as an option. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 2

[Red Hat Bugzilla] Your Outstanding Requests
by Red Hat Bugzilla 20 Jul '15

20 Jul '15

The following is a list of bugs or attachments to bugs in which a user has been waiting more than 7 days for a response from you. Please take action on these requests as quickly as possible. (Note that some of these bugs might already be closed, but a user is still waiting for your response.) We'll remind you again in another 7 days if these requests are still outstanding, or if there are any new requests where users have been waiting more than 7 days for your response. review ------ Bug 1124344: yum --security update doesn't work on non-fedora repos. This limitation is probably undocumented. (293 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 1244419] New: id.fedoraproject. orĝ gives no context whatsoever
by Red Hat Bugzilla 19 Jul '15

19 Jul '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1244419 Bug ID: 1244419 Summary: id.fedoraproject.orĝ gives no context whatsoever Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: about-fedora Assignee: stickster(a)gmail.com Reporter: federicoleva(a)tiscali.it QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: stickster(a)gmail.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Sorry, did not find a suitable component. askbot sent me to https://id.fedoraproject.org/login/fas?ipsilon_transaction_id=d77111f9-fdd5… ; I think I had a login, but there is no "reset password" form. The page doesn't contain any information whatsoever about the system, other than a "fedora AuthN" logo at the top. https://id.fedoraproject.org/ doesn't give any clue either. It's therefore impossible for me to understand whether I should be here in the first place, where to look for information, how to register, how to recover credentials if I have them already, etc. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 2

[Red Hat Bugzilla] Your Outstanding Requests
by Red Hat Bugzilla 13 Jul '15

13 Jul '15

The following is a list of bugs or attachments to bugs in which a user has been waiting more than 7 days for a response from you. Please take action on these requests as quickly as possible. (Note that some of these bugs might already be closed, but a user is still waiting for your response.) We'll remind you again in another 7 days if these requests are still outstanding, or if there are any new requests where users have been waiting more than 7 days for your response. review ------ Bug 1124344: yum --security update doesn't work on non-fedora repos. This limitation is probably undocumented. (286 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 06 Jul '15

06 Jul '15

The following is a list of bugs or attachments to bugs in which a user has been waiting more than 7 days for a response from you. Please take action on these requests as quickly as possible. (Note that some of these bugs might already be closed, but a user is still waiting for your response.) We'll remind you again in another 7 days if these requests are still outstanding, or if there are any new requests where users have been waiting more than 7 days for your response. review ------ Bug 1124344: yum --security update doesn't work on non-fedora repos. This limitation is probably undocumented. (279 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 July 2015