February 2016 - docs-qa - Fedora Mailing-Lists

[Bug 915751] New: Remove BuildArch: noarch from the meta package example

by Red Hat Bugzilla

Product: Fedora Documentation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=915751 Bug ID: 915751 Summary: Remove BuildArch: noarch from the meta package example Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: software-collections-guide Severity: high Priority: high Reporter: pkovar(a)redhat.com Remove BuildArch: noarch from the meta package example in: http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora_Contributor_Documentation/1/ht... (Changed in scl-utils-20121110.) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

6 years, 4 months

2
1
0 / 0

[Bug 769438] New: [PATCH] Fix syntax of code examples within rpm-guide-programming-python.xml

by Red Hat Bugzilla

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: [PATCH] Fix syntax of code examples within rpm-guide-programming-python.xml https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=769438 Summary: [PATCH] Fix syntax of code examples within rpm-guide-programming-python.xml Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: Unspecified Status: NEW Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Component: rpm-guide AssignedTo: bcotton+fedora(a)gmail.com ReportedBy: dmalcolm(a)redhat.com QAContact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: oglesbyzm(a)gmail.com, pkovar(a)redhat.com Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Created attachment 548940 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=548940 Patch to Rpm Guide to fix rpm-guide-programming-python.xml Unfortunately the examples of Python code within the RPM guide have been thoroughly broken since the initial conversion to DocBook, due to the way Python treats leading whitespace as significant. I'm attaching a patch which overhauls this page, so that the code examples are syntactically valid. See the notes in the patch -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.

6 years, 4 months

2
5
0 / 0

[Bug 1253462] New: Error in http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora_Draft_Documentation/0.1/html/RPM_Guide/ch16s03s05.html

by Red Hat Bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1253462 Bug ID: 1253462 Summary: Error in http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora_Draft_Docum entation/0.1/html/RPM_Guide/ch16s03s05.html Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: rpm-guide Severity: low Assignee: bcotton+fedora(a)gmail.com Reporter: nbasanes(a)cisco.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: bcotton+fedora(a)gmail.com, pkovar(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Created attachment 1062752 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1062752&action=edit This attachment is a screenshot of a more readable result. Description of problem: The Python code section at http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora_Draft_Documentation/0.1/html/R... has an error in the following code: # Dependencies print "Provides:" print h.dsFromHeader('providename') print "Requires:" print h.dsFromHeader('requirename') if h.dsFromHeader('obsoletename'): print "Obsoletes:" print h.dsFromHeader('obsoletename') if h.dsFromHeader('conflictname'): print "Conflicts:" print h.dsFromHeader('conflictname') print h.dsFromHeader('conflictname') outputs <rpm.ds object at 0xb77584b8>. h.dsFromHeader('conflictname'), without the "print" word, outputs it right. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 0.1 How reproducible: Steps to Reproduce: 1. Copy the python code from the page to a file called rpminfo.py on a computer that has the older version of Python, Python 2. 2. Run the Python code, by running the "cd" command until you get to the folder that contains rpminfo.py. 3. Run rpminfo.py by entering the command python rpminfo.py. Actual results: Provides: <rpm.ds object at 0xb77584b8> Requires: <rpm.ds object at 0xb77584b8> Expected results: Provides: P config(httpd) = 2.2.15-39.el6.centos Requires: R libapr-1.so.0 Additional info: The members of the object returned by dsFromHeader have integer indexes, since the following code produces a more readable result: # Dependencies print "Provides:" print h.dsFromHeader('providename')[0] print "Requires:" print h.dsFromHeader('requirename')[0] -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

6 years, 4 months

2
4
0 / 0

[Bug 1163568] New: POSIX capabilities "%caps" macro not mentioned anyhwere

by Red Hat Bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1163568 Bug ID: 1163568 Summary: POSIX capabilities "%caps" macro not mentioned anyhwere Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: rpm-guide Severity: medium Assignee: bcotton+fedora(a)gmail.com Reporter: matt(a)nightrealms.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: bcotton+fedora(a)gmail.com, pkovar(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co The RPM guide doesn't mention the "%caps" macro which can be used to set a file's POSIX capabilities (see http://linux.die.net/man/7/capabilities). It should go in chapter 9, section 5.4, at URL http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora_Draft_Documentation/0.1/html/R... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

6 years, 4 months

2
1
0 / 0

[Bug 1115469] New: Link to full documentation is incorrect

by Red Hat Bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1115469 Bug ID: 1115469 Summary: Link to full documentation is incorrect Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: rpm-guide Assignee: bcotton+fedora(a)gmail.com Reporter: msuchy(a)redhat.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: bcotton+fedora(a)gmail.com, pkovar(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Description of problem: This page: http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora_Draft_Documentation/0.1/html/R... links to /usr/share/doc/rpm-devel-4.1/apidocs/html/group__python.html Which does not exist on recent Fedoras. RPM API is documented at: /usr/share/doc/rpm-apidocs/index.html And I did not find documentation for rpm-python itself. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

6 years, 4 months

2
1
0 / 0

[Bug 1025475] New: typo in yum update for kexi-mysql

by Red Hat Bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1025475 Bug ID: 1025475 Summary: typo in yum update for kexi-mysql Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: rpm-guide Assignee: bcotton+fedora(a)gmail.com Reporter: admin(a)velusuniverse.co.uk QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: bcotton+fedora(a)gmail.com, pkovar(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Description of problem: calligra-kexi-driver-mysql summary says mysqwl driver for kexi but shouldnt it say mysql driver for kexi ?? Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How reproducible: use the yum extender andd look up calligra-kexi-driver-mysql Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3. Actual results: ummary says mysqwl driver for kexi Expected results: mysql driver for kexi Additional info: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

6 years, 4 months

2
1
0 / 0

[Bug 1017792] New: %verify doesn't know symlink, maj min

by Red Hat Bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1017792 Bug ID: 1017792 Summary: %verify doesn't know symlink, maj min Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: rpm-guide Assignee: bcotton+fedora(a)gmail.com Reporter: jskarvad(a)redhat.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: bcotton+fedora(a)gmail.com, pkovar(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Description of problem: In the "Verifying the %files section" chapter of the RPM guide [1], there is written "symlink", but it seems RPM uses "link" instead. Also I had trouble with the "maj" and "min", I guess there is "rdev" used instead. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 0.1 How reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. See the "Verifying the %files section" chapter Actual results: There are symlink, maj and min Expected results: The link and probably rdev Additional info: [1] http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora_Draft_Documentation/0.1/html/R... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

6 years, 4 months

2
2
0 / 0

[Bug 1003962] New: RPM scriptlet -p option not documented

by Red Hat Bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1003962 Bug ID: 1003962 Summary: RPM scriptlet -p option not documented Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: rpm-guide Assignee: bcotton+fedora(a)gmail.com Reporter: daniel.neuberger(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 The fedora RPM guide does not document the -p option that can be passed to the RPM scriptlets. It should probably be located here http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora_Draft_Documentation/0.1/html/R..., but I looked through the entire guide and couldn't find it. The only only place I could find it documented is here https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets, but what it says is wrong. It says: "The basic syntax is similar to the %build, %install, and other sections of the rpm spec file. The scripts support a special flag, -p which allows the scriptlet to invoke a single program directly rather than having to spawn a shell to invoke the programs. (ie: %post -p /sbin/ldconfig)" A more accurate description is: "The basic syntax is similar to the %build, %install, and other sections of the rpm spec file. The scripts support a special flag, -p which specifies the interPreter that should be used to run the script (the default is /bin/sh). Sometimes the -p option is used with no body in order to run a single command directly rather than having to spawn a shell to invoke the programs (i.e. %post -p /sbin/ldconfig). Note that this form requires that there be nothing but white space (not even comments) until the next section begins." -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

6 years, 4 months

2
7
0 / 0

[Bug 1057882] New: Fedora - Installation Quick Start Guide - An update of the Czech translation ready

by Red Hat Bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1057882 Bug ID: 1057882 Summary: Fedora - Installation Quick Start Guide - An update of the Czech translation ready Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: publishing-requests Assignee: docs-publishers-members(a)fedoraproject.org Reporter: josef.hruska(a)upcmail.cz QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: docs-publishers-members(a)fedoraproject.org Description of problem: Please publish an updated Czech version of the F20 Installation Quick Start Guide Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How reproducible: Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3. Actual results: Mostly grammar errors found in current version. Expected results: An updated Czech translation published - missing translation(s) added, translation revision and precision. Additional info: If the bug BZ#1056196 is a serious obstacle, publish this update once the bug is resolved. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

6 years, 4 months

2
1
0 / 0

[Bug 1050903] New: Fedora - burning ISO images to disc - Updated Czech translation

by Red Hat Bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1050903 Bug ID: 1050903 Summary: Fedora - burning ISO images to disc - Updated Czech translation Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: publishing-requests Assignee: docs-publishers-members(a)fedoraproject.org Reporter: josef.hruska(a)upcmail.cz QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: docs-publishers-members(a)fedoraproject.org Description of problem: Please publish an update of the Czech translation of Burning ISO images to disc guide Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How reproducible: Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3. Actual results: Expected results: Translation update - missing translation, revision and precision. Additional info: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

6 years, 4 months

2
1
0 / 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

docs-qa February 2016