docs-qa March 2017

docs-qa@lists.fedoraproject.org

1 participants
73 discussions

[Bug 1420569] New: Fedora 25 networking-guide section 9.2 has wrong package name for the dhcp-server package.
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 11 Jul '17

11 Jul '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1420569 Bug ID: 1420569 Summary: Fedora 25 networking-guide section 9.2 has wrong package name for the dhcp-server package. Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: networking-guide Severity: low Assignee: swadeley(a)redhat.com Reporter: stolidmollusc(a)gmail.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: swadeley(a)redhat.com Description of problem: Wrong package name given in Section 9.2. Configuring a DHCP Server. The document instructs users to install package 'dhcp'; the correct package name is 'dhcp-server'. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 25 How reproducible: Read section 9.2 at https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/25/html/Networking_Guide/sec-dh… Steps to Reproduce: 1. See the first few lines about how to install a dhcp server. Actual results: The document states: "The dhcp package contains an Internet Systems Consortium (ISC) DHCP server. Install the package as root: ~]# dnf install dhcp Installing the dhcp package creates a file, /etc/dhcp/dhcpd.conf, ..." Expected results: All mentions of the 'dhcp' package should be changed to the 'dhcp-server' package. I found just the 3 instances quoted above. Additional info: At least since Fedora 24, 'dhcp-server' is the package that provides the documented component. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 1

[Bug 1322076] New: uefi secure boot, update examples that are fedora specific
by Red Hat Bugzilla 11 Jul '17

11 Jul '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1322076 Bug ID: 1322076 Summary: uefi secure boot, update examples that are fedora specific Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: system-administrator's-guide Severity: low Assignee: swadeley(a)redhat.com Reporter: bugzilla(a)colorremedies.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: swadeley(a)redhat.com Super low priority. The existing examples aren't Fedora specific and are more verbose than on a Fedora system. https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/23/html/System_Administrators_G… Fedora 23, system without secure boot: # keyctl list %:.system_keyring 1 key in keyring: 436069891: ---lswrv 0 0 asymmetric: Fedora kernel signing key: 123842f3d8cc3f140fa50a22fc9bc014cefcf2bf Fedora 23, system with secure boot enabled: # keyctl list %:.system_keyring 4 keys in keyring: 57620495: ---lswrv 0 0 asymmetric: Microsoft Windows Production PCA 2011: a92902398e16c49778cd90f99e4f9ae17c55af53 17001967: ---lswrv 0 0 asymmetric: Fedora kernel signing key: 123842f3d8cc3f140fa50a22fc9bc014cefcf2bf 462910956: ---lswrv 0 0 asymmetric: Fedora Secure Boot CA: fde32599c2d61db1bf5807335d7b20e4cd963b42 837240830: ---lswrv 0 0 asymmetric: Microsoft Corporation UEFI CA 2011: 13adbf4309bd82709c8cd54f316ed522988a1bd4 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

2 7

[Bug 982899] New: 7.3.1. Establishing a Wired (Ethernet) Connection
by Red Hat Bugzilla 11 Jul '17

11 Jul '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=982899 Bug ID: 982899 Summary: 7.3.1. Establishing a Wired (Ethernet) 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: In section 7.3.1: Default connection no longer called 'em1' No field for 'connection name' you can add new settings for the network under different profiles by selecting 'add profile...' you can remove/reset a profile by going to the 'options' button under the profile and selecting the 'reset' item on the left, and then choosing to either 'reset' or 'forget' -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

2 6

[Bug 1359421] New: More than typo errors Fedora 24 Release notes Section 3.
by Red Hat Bugzilla 08 May '17

08 May '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359421 Bug ID: 1359421 Summary: More than typo errors Fedora 24 Release notes Section 3. Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: release-notes Severity: low 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 Within ⁠3.1.2. GNOME 3.20 Photos can edit and export photos! ...... Photos is not a default application. Do you mean Shotwell or do you mean Photos: You can edit and export photos!...... Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): file:///usr/share/doc/fedora-release-notes/en-US/sect-Release_Notes-Changes_for_Desktop.html 3.2.1. Firefox 45 Firefox 47.1 was released with F24 3.2.2. QupZilla 2 Please add dnf install qupzilla. I had problems with dnf install QupZilla 3.2.6. TeXLive 2015 She then runs TeX to produce formatted ... (translation error, Replace "She" with "the user" Could the English web pages be touched up? I live in French, but much prefer English. Ditto for my Russian and Spanish friends -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

2 2

[Bug 1198643] New: Append parameters to grub.cfg
by Red Hat Bugzilla 08 May '17

08 May '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1198643 Bug ID: 1198643 Summary: Append parameters to grub.cfg Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: virtualization-guide Assignee: docs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Reporter: geanceretta(a)gmail.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: docs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, lnovich(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Description of problem: The instructions[1] of how to append parameters to Grub's grub.config file is obsolete on recent releases of Fedora. The file /boot/grub/grub.conf doesn't exist anymore. The way to do it now is (tested on Fedora 20): 1 - Edit /etc/default/grub 2 - Append information at the line GRUBCMDLINELINUX=" ... console=tty0 console=ttyS0,115200 ... ") 3 - Regenerate the /boot/grub2/grub.cfg file with the command "grub2-mkconfig -o /boot/grub2/grub.cfg" Link: [1] http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/18/html/Virtualization_Administr… Additional info: The documentation is refered to version 18 where it should work, but as we don't have a documentation in a most atual release of Fedora for that subject, you can write a note for the users of most recent releases of Fedora that came with Grub2, where the procedure is according with that listed above. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

2 4

[Bug 1225034] New: Install guide edit of the first 25 PDF pages.
by Red Hat Bugzilla 08 May '17

08 May '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1225034 Bug ID: 1225034 Summary: Install guide edit of the first 25 PDF pages. Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: install-guide Assignee: pbokoc(a)redhat.com Reporter: lsatenstein(a)yahoo.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: pbokoc(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Created attachment 1029929 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1029929&action=edit LibreOffice editing comments against the first 25 pages of the Install guide. Description of problem: There were many typos and statements that do not apply to Fedora 22. The attached libreoffice document details the editing I have performed for the first 25 pages of the PDF manual version. If you reject the errors or accept them, please respond to this bugzilla report so that I may know if it is worth doing the next 25 of the 200 pdf pages. Refer also to 100875 Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): Install guide for Fedora 22 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.

2 3

[Red Hat Bugzilla] Your Outstanding Requests
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 27 Mar '17

27 Mar '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. (909 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 1435506] New: first search result for "list of files in RPM package" is the *Romanian* documentation
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 23 Mar '17

23 Mar '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1435506 Bug ID: 1435506 Summary: first search result for "list of files in RPM package" is the *Romanian* documentation Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Component: about-fedora Severity: low Assignee: stickster(a)gmail.com Reporter: info(a)skierpage.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: stickster(a)gmail.com, zach(a)oglesby.co (This bug report is not about these specific pages, but about the multiple undifferentiated versions of documentation pages on docs.fedoraproject.org and the poor search experience this engenders.) I Googled for "list of files in RPM package" (without the quotes. First result I get is "4.2.3. Listing the files in a package - Fedora Documentation", looks promising. But the URL is https://docs.fedoraproject.org/ro/Fedora_Draft_Documentation/0.1/html/RPM_G… , the *Romanian* documentation. It's mostly in English but previous and next are "Înapoi and Înainte." Here's another example of search failing to return an appropriate page. If I Google "Fedora uninstall RPM package", the second result is "4.2.5 Removing Packages - Fedora Documentation", again this looks promising. But the URL is https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/16/html/System_Administrators_G… , Fedora *16* documentation. Fedora 16 reached End of Life four years ago! How reproducible: Every time for me, even in a private window. Steps to Reproduce: 1. https://www.google.com/search?q=list+of+files+in+RPM+package 2. https://www.google.com/search?q=Fedora+uninstall+RPM Actual results: The only result from docs.fedoraproject.org on the first page isn't even English documentation. I would expect to get https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora_Draft_Documentation/0.1/html/RP… as my first result. Expected results: Pages must identify their language [1] and give rel="alternate" links to the page in other languages [2]. Pages should also use a canonical URL to identify the "master" version of the documentation (Fedora 25 right now) [3], so the Fedora 16 documentation of some feature gets lower search ranking than the documentation for the current Fedora version. I think you could also put language information for the canonical (most recent Fedora version) URLs into a sitemap on docs.fedoraproject.org [4] instead of updating all these old pages. As far as I can tell, docs.fedoraproject.org pages do none of these, hence it's hit or miss what Google returns. [1] https://www.w3.org/International/questions/qa-html-language-declarations [2] https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/189077?hl=en [3] https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/139066?hl=en [4] https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/2620865?hl=en&ref_topic=2370587 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 0

[Red Hat Bugzilla] Your Outstanding Requests
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 20 Mar '17

20 Mar '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. (902 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 13 Mar '17

13 Mar '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. (895 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

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

docs-qa March 2017