docs-qa December 2017

docs-qa@lists.fedoraproject.org

1 participants
57 discussions

[Bug 1365347] New: Please Publish edits made to virt-getting-started and Release notes
by Red Hat Bugzilla 14 Dec '17

14 Dec '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1365347 Bug ID: 1365347 Summary: Please Publish edits made to virt-getting-started and Release notes Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: publishing-requests Assignee: docs-publishers-members(a)fedoraproject.org Reporter: grundblom(a)fedoraproject.org QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: docs-publishers-members(a)fedoraproject.org Hello, I have made corrections to the release notes, and I would like to request to have them published to the website (docs.fedoraproject.org) Also, I would like to request that the Virtualization Getting Started Guide become available on the website (docs.fedoraproject.org) The Virtualization Getting Started Guide has been migrated to: https://pagure.io/virt-getting-started-guide Let me know if you need more information or I have missed a step in this process to get these published. Thank you very much! -Glen -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

2 3

[Bug 1276867] New: Packaging:SourceURL#Git Tags is erroneous for GitHub repository
by Red Hat Bugzilla 14 Dec '17

14 Dec '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1276867 Bug ID: 1276867 Summary: Packaging:SourceURL#Git Tags is erroneous for GitHub repository Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: packager-guide Severity: high Assignee: pkovar(a)redhat.com Reporter: francis.andre.kampbell(a)orange.fr QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: pkovar(a)redhat.com Hi The documentation about specifying SourceURL at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL, chapter Git Tags is erroneous setup should be %prep %setup -qn %{name}-%{gittag0} [GitHub] instead of %prep %setup -qn %{name}-%{version} [GitHub] -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

2 1

[Bug 985020] New: explain types of rpm packages (what are they for)
by Red Hat Bugzilla 14 Dec '17

14 Dec '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=985020 Bug ID: 985020 Summary: explain types of rpm packages (what are they for) Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: packager-guide Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Assignee: pkovar(a)redhat.com Reporter: bvoperdf21(a)mt2014.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: pkovar(a)redhat.com Description of problem: First I'd like to thank for the awesome documentaions available. Also +1 for the export function (PDF,html-single,...). Looking at the packagers guide I missed some information. It would be nice if you also tell what kind of rpm packages are out there. What I found so far: .rpm .src.rpm .debugsource.... .debuginfo.... For example I still don't know if the debugsource is needed when using gdb for debugging or if the debuginfo package is enough. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):Edition 18.0.1 How reproducible: Steps to Reproduce: 1.go to http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora_Draft_Documentation/0.1/html/Pac… 2.read everything Actual results: no description of the defferent types of rpm packages Expected results: find description of the defferent types of rpm packages and what they are used for/by. Additional info: would be nice to have this -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

2 1

[Bug 959626] New: config_name mismatch in mock example
by Red Hat Bugzilla 14 Dec '17

14 Dec '17

Product: Fedora Documentation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=959626 Bug ID: 959626 Summary: config_name mismatch in mock example Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: packager-guide Severity: low Priority: unspecified Assignee: pkovar(a)redhat.com Reporter: axilleas(a)archlinux.gr QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: fnadge(a)redhat.com Category: --- Description of problem: In section 2.4.3. Testing a Package with Mock, the last example uses the epel-6-x86_64 config whereas Fedora 18 is referenced above. According to the preamble, the example should read: mock -r fedora-18-x86_64 ~/rpmbuild/SRPMS/eject-2.1.5-0.1.fc18.src.rpm Link: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora_Draft_Documentation/0.1/html/Pa… -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

2 1

[Red Hat Bugzilla] Your Outstanding Requests
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 11 Dec '17

11 Dec '17

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. (1168 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 bugzilla＠redhat.com 04 Dec '17

04 Dec '17

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. (1161 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 1519897] New: Typo in Section 18.7. Interaction of Rsyslog and Journal
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 01 Dec '17

01 Dec '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1519897 Bug ID: 1519897 Summary: Typo in Section 18.7. Interaction of Rsyslog and Journal Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: system-administrator's-guide Assignee: swadeley(a)redhat.com Reporter: bugzilla.redhat.com(a)whyaskwhy.org QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: swadeley(a)redhat.com Original line: The above syntax loads the imuxsock module and turns off the $OmitLocalLogging directive, which enables the import trough the system socket. New line: The above syntax loads the imuxsock module and turns off the $OmitLocalLogging directive, which enables the import through the system socket. Reference: https://docs-old.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/26/html/System_Administrato… I may have overlooked it, but I did not see a guide or Fedora 27 that I could check against to see whether the typo was already fixed for that version. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 0

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

docs-qa December 2017